UmARY   "^ 

UN. 'VERS! 
CAUFO 


im  OF  J 


G-^n.  Wh 

f-ntr^'f 

f7Y  -/m 

^7^  ^^f^ 

t 

^'^- 


A  GENERAL  INTRODUCTION   TO 
THE  STUDY  OF  HOLY  SCRIPTURE 


A  GENERAL 


INTRODUCTION 


TO  THE  STUDY  OF 


Holy  Scripture 

BY 

A.  E.  BREEN,  Ph.  D.,  D.  D. 


Tlaaa     ypa(f>7j     Oeoirvevcrro^     koX     Q)(f>eXL/jLo<i     tt/oo?     hihaaKaXiav^ 

irpiy;  €\€y)(^ov^  irpw:    iTrat/opdooaiv^   irpo^    iraiheCav    rrjv  iv 

SiKaLoa-vvy,     "Iva  apTLO^  ^   6    rov    deov  avOpcoirof; 

7r/309    Trdv    epyov    aya66v    e^r)pTLap.€VOfi. 


SECOND  EDITION 
REVISED  AND  ENLARGED 


ROCHESTER,    N.  Y. 
JOHN    P.    SMITH    PRINTING    COMPANY 
1908 


ej^'^^^-^ 


llgAN  STACK 


i^3?/A 


/TwfiAfA^ 


Rochester^  N.  K,  February  /,  /po<y. 


Preface  to  the  Second  Edition. 


We  live  in  an  age  of  great  activity.  It  is  also  an  age 
wherein  material  progress  and  the  love  of  worldly  pleasure  tend 
to  enfeeble  man's  hold  on  the  supernatural  world.  It  is  most 
evident  that  there  is  a  general  movement  away  from  the 
spiritual  world.  In  non-Catholic  thought  the  idea  of  a  reduced 
Christianity  is  dominant .  A  mere  natural  religion  recommends 
itself  to  many.  **The  natural  man  receiveth  not  the  things  of 
the  Spirit  of  God :  for  they  are  foolishness  unto  him ;  and  he 
cannot  know  them  because  they  are  spiritually  examined." 
[I.  Cor.  II.  14.]  Instead  of  accepting  religion  as  a  mysterious 
message  from  Heaven,  men  make  a  religion  that  is  not  religious. 
A  religion  is  sought  that  will  not  interfere  with  man's  worldly 
tastes  and  pleasures.  Human  reason  is  made  the  judge  of  all 
the  works  of  God.  Arianism  is  recrudescent  under  another 
name  and  formula.  The  mystery  of  Christ's  Divinity,  the 
miracles  of  the  Bible,  the  extraordinary  action  of  God  in  the 
Revelation  and  Inspiration  of  the  Scriptures  are  made  the 
special  objects  of  attack  in  this  modem  fashion  of  thought. 

That  which  is  most  deplorable  is  that  this  tendency  has 
in  some  degree  invaded  the  minds  of  some  Catholic  scholars. 
Clear  calls  of  warning  come  from  Christ's  Vicar;  the  danger  is 
grave.  The  demon  of  unbelief  finds  strong  allies  in  the  pride 
and  rebellion  of  fallen  human  nature. 

During  the  last  twenty-five  years  the  Church  has  waged  a 
fierce  battle  in  defense  of  the  Holy  Scriptures.  In  this  fight 
her  worst  enemies  are  those  of  her  own  children,  who,  making 
dishonorable  compromises  with  the  Rationalists,  the  "true 
children  and  inheritors  of  the  older  heretics,"  make  a  breach 
in  the  walls  which  they  have  sworn  to  defend. 


General  Introduction  teaches  the  art  of  studying  Holy 
Scripture : 

"Vie  piu  che  indamo  da  riva  si  parte, 

Perche  non  toma  tal  qual  ei  si  muove, 
Chi  pesca  per  lo  vero  e  non  ha  Tarte." 

The  study  of  Holy  Scripture  is  proposed  in  that  remarkable 
encyclical,  'Trovidentissimus  Deus,"  as  the  chief  remedy 
against  the  evil  doctrinal  tendencies  of  our  time.  This  study 
cannot  be  pursued  without  a  competent  knowledge  of  the 
questions  which  an  Introduction  to  Holy  Scripture  treats. 
The  very  key  to  the  present  situation  is  a  right  idea  of  the 
Inspiration  of  Holy  Scripture.  Hence  in  this  Second  Edition 
of  my  work,  I  have  devoted  about  one  third  of  the  volume  to 
this  great  theme.  I  have  endeavored  in  all  things  to  be  con- 
servative. I  have  endeavored  to  present  a  fair  examination  of 
the  different  theories,  and  in  judging  of  them,  the  authority  of 
the  Church  has  been  the  norm.  My  treatise  on  the  Canon  of 
the  Old  Testament  may  be  judged  excessively  long,  but  I  have 
contemplated  this  as  a  work  of  reference,  in  which  completeness 
of  treatment  is  required.  M^  hope  is  that  I  may  have,  in  some 
small  degree,  helped  the  Cause  of  Christ. 

A.  E.   BREEN. 


Rochester,  N.  Y., 

Feast  of  the  Circumcision  of  Our  Lord,  1908. 


CONTENTS 


CHAPTER 

I.  Revelation  and  Its  Criterion    -         -         -         - 

II.  Extent  of  Inspiration  .         .         _         _         _ 

III.  The  Canon  -------- 

IV.  The  Canon  of  the  Old  Testament  -    -    - 
V.  Ezra  and  His  Influence   -    _    .    -    . 

VI.  The  Alexandrian  Canon   _    _    -    _    - 

VII.  The  Canon  of  the  Church     -    _    .    - 

VIII.  The  Canon  of  the  Old  Testament  of  the  Fourth 

Century     _-_--_- 

IX.     The  Canon  op  the  Old  Testament  from  the  End 

OF  the  Fifth  Century  to  the  Beginning  of 

THE  Twelfth  Century  -         _         _         _ 

X.     The    Canon    of    the    Old   Testament    from    the 

Beginning  of  the  Thirteenth  Century  to 

the  Council  of  Trent  _         _         _         _ 

XI.     The  Council  op  Trent  -         -         -         -         - 

XII,     The  Canon  of  the  New  Testament    -         -         - 

XIII.  The  New  Testament  of  the  Sects 

XIV.  The  Apocryphal  Books  of  Both  Testaments 
XV.     The  Lost  Books  of  Both  Testaments 

XVI.  The  Hebrew  Text  of  the  Old  Testament 

XVII.  The  Greek  Text  .-.--. 

XVIII.  The  Uncial  Codices      ------ 

XIX  The  Septuagint  and  Other  Greek  Versions 

XX.  Versions  Derived  from  the  Septuagint     - 

XXI.  The  Targums  -         -         -         -         -         -  .     - 

XXII.  The  Ancient  Versions  _         -         -         _         - 

XXIII.  The  Vulgate  - 

XXIV.  The  Authorization  of  the  Latin  Vulgate 
XXV.  The  Correction  of  the  Vulgate         _         _         - 

XXVI.     The  English  Versions           _         -  _         _  - 

XXVII.  The  Interpretation  of  Scripture 

XXVIII.  Jewish  Interpretation          .         _  -         -  _ 
Index       _         -         ,         -        -  -  - 


page 
1 
198 
239 
240 
246 
259 
263 

360 


466 


502 
516 
529 
605 
606 
623 
625 
642 
663 
686 
698 
705 
707 
726 
729 
754 
766 
779 
796 
805 


A  General   Introduction  to 
Holy  Scripture. 


Chapter  I. 
Revelation  and  its  Criterion. 

The  science  of  Introduction  to  Holy  Scripture  has  for 
its  object  to  treat  of  the  Books  of  Inspired  Scripture,  their 
Number,  the  Nature  of  Inspiration,  the  Authenticity  of 
the  several  books,  the  Canon,  the  ancient  Codices,  the  Ver- 
sions of  Holy  Scripture,  the  History  of  the  Text,  the  Decrees 
of  the  Church  regarding  the  Holy  Books  and  the  Laws  of 
Expounding  Holy  Scripture. 

The  existence  of  inspired  writings  is  a  fact  warranted  by 
the  most  convincing  data.  The  tradition  of  the  Jews,  the 
approbation  of  Christ,  the  traditions  of  Christians,  the  sub- 
limity of  the  writings,  the  verification  of  prophecies,  and  the 
universal  belief  of  civilized  mankind  are  alone  natural 
motives  of  credibility  which  logically  produce  certainty. 
Moreover,  those  who  are  incorporated  in  the  organized 
economy  of  the  New  Law  have  the  living  voice  of  the  Holy 
Ghost,  declaring  through  the  Church:  ''And  this  super- 
natural revelation,  according  to  the  faith  of  the  universal  Church, 
declared  in  the  Holy  Tridentine  Synod,  is  contained  in  the  writ- 
ten hooks  and  unwritten  traditions,  ivhich  have  come  down  to 
us.''     [Vat.  Council,  Cap.  11.  De  Revelatione.] 

The  existence  of  divinely  inspired  Scripture  is  so  essen- 
tially bound  up  with  the  existence  of  religion  itself  that  they 
stand  or  fall  together.  Ancient  history  and  modern  history 
make  the  existence  of  an  authentic  written  message  from 


2  REVELATION   AND   ITS   CRITERION 

God  to  man  a  necessity.  The  writers  of  the  Old  Law  abund- 
antly proved  by  miracles  the  divine  commission  to  deliver 
in  writing  the  message  of  God.  The  great  revelation  of 
God  through  Christ  added  certainty  to  certainty ;  and  Christ- 
ianity continues  through  the  ages  to  present  the  proofs  of 
the  divinity  of  the  Holy  Books.  No  man  will  deny  that 
the  Christian  religion  is  a  fact;  and  w^ere  there  no  divinely 
inspired  Scriptures,  that  fact  would  not  have  a  sufficient 
cause.  The  Christian  Church  draws  her  life  from  two 
fountains,  the  Holy  Scriptures  and  the  living  voice  of  the 
Holy  Ghost  within  her.  Had  it  so  pleased  God  he  could 
have  founded,  and  could  have  conserved  religion  without 
any  written  message.  However,  considering  the  nature  of 
man,  it  seems  more  conformable  to  the  wisdom  of  God  to 
deliver  to  man  a  written  deposit  which  should  be  an  ever- 
lasting memorial  of  God's  teachings.  Moreover,  religion 
claims  to  possess  divine  Scriptures ;  the  Jews  received  their 
Scriptures  from  Moses  and  the  Prophets,  and  handed  them 
down  to  the  Christian  Church.  Jesus  Christ  appealed  to 
these  Scriptures  as  the  infallible  message  of  God;  all  the 
writers  of  the  New  Testament  corroborate  the  doctrine  of 
the  existence  of  divinely  inspired  Scriptures.  Hence  to 
deny  the  existence  of  inspired  Books  is  tantamount  to  deny 
that  religion  exists. 

Having  once  placed  as  a  basic  position  that  there  exist 
divinely  inspired  writings,  the  next  step  is  to  determine 
how  we  may  infallibly  discern  and  know  what  is  inspired 
and  what  is  not.  We  must  establish  an  adequate  criterion, 
which  can  discriminate,  from  all  other  books,  the  products 
of  the  authorship  of  God. 

Inspiration,  in  its  formal  concept,  is  a  supernatural  psycho- 
logical effect,  wrought  in  the  mind  of  the  inspired  agent  by  the 
First  Cause.  We  might  define  it,  using  the  conciseness  and 
precision  of  the  Latin  idiom:  Illustratio  mentis  et  motus 
efflcax  voluntatis  a  Deo,  ad  exprimendum  infallibiliter  sensum 
Dei,  seu  ad  exprimenda  ea  omnia  et  sola  quae  Deus  vult.  Now 
it  is  plainly  evident  that  a  fact  of  such  nature  can  be  im- 
mediately known  but  to  two  beings,  God  and  the  person 
inspired. 


REVELATION   AND   ITS    CRITERION  3 

It  must  be  conceded  that  many  of  the  inspired  writers 
were  conscious  of  their  inspiration.  Some  expHcitly  declare 
that  they  had  received  a  commission  to  write:  such  are 
Moses,  Isaiah,  Jeremiah,  Habakkuk  and  others.  David 
declares :  "And  the  man  who  was  raised  on  high  saith,  the 
Anointed  of  the  God  of  Jacob,  and  the  sweet  Psalmist  of 
Israel :  The  Spirit  of  the  Lord  spake  by  me,  and  his  word 
was  upon  my  tongue." — II.  Sam.  XXIII.  1,2. 

But  in  other  inspired  books  we  find  no  evidence  that  the 
author  was  conscious  that  he  wrote  under  divine  inspiration. 
The  writer  of  the  Second  Book  of  Maccabees  declares  thus 
of  his  work : 

"And  all  such  things  as  have  been  comprised  in  five 
books  by  Jason  of  Cyrene,  we  have  attempted  to  abridge  in 
one  book. 

"For  considering  the  multitude  of  books,  and  the  diffi- 
culty that  they  find  that  desire  to  undertake  the  narrations 
of  histories,  because  of  the  multitude  of  the  matter, 

"We  have  taken  care  for  those  indeed  that  are  willing 
to  read,  that  it  might  be  a  pleasure  of  mind:  and  for  the 
studious,  that  they  may  more  easily  commit  to  memory: 
and  that  all  that  read  might  receive  profit. 

"And  as  to  ourselves  indeed,  in  undertaking  this  work 
of  abridging,  we  have  taken  in  hand  no  easy  task,  yea  rather 
a  business  full  of  watching  and  sweat. 

"But  as  they  that  prepare  a  feast,  and  seek  to  satisfy 
the  will  of  others :  for  the  sake  of  many,  we  willingly  undergo 
the  labour. 

"Leaving  to  the  authors  the  exact  handling  of  every 
particular,  and  as  for  ourselves,  according  to  the  plan  pro- 
posed, studying  to  be  brief. 

"For  as  the  master  builder  of  a  new  house  must  have 
care  of  the  whole  building :  but  he  that  taketh  care  to  paint 
it,  must  seek  out  fit  things  for  the  adorning  of  it :  so  must  it 
be  judged  for  us. 

"For  to  collect  all  that  is  to  be  known,  to  put  the  dis- 
course in  order,  and  curiously  to  discuss  every  particular 
point,  is  the  duty  of  the  author  of  a  history: 


4  REVELATION   AND    ITS    CRITERION 

"But  to  pursue  brevity  of  speech,  and  to  avoid  nice 
declarations  of  things,  is  to  be  granted  to  him  that  maketh 
an  abridgement."     (II.  Maccab.  II.  24-32.) 

The  same  writer  draws  his  work  to  a  conclusion  in  the 
following  words : 

"So  these  things  being  done  w^ith  relation  to  Nicanor, 
and  from  that  time  the  cit}?-  being  possessed  by  the  Hebrews, 
I  also  will  here  make  an  end  of  my  narration. 

"Which  if  I  have  done  well,  and  as  it  becometh  the 
history,  it  is  what  I  desired :  but  if  not  so  perfectly,  it  must 
be  pardoned  me . ' ' — Chap  .15,  Ver  .39. 

There  is  strong  evidence  here  that  the  writer  was  uncon- 
scious of  his  inspiration. 

In  the  preamble  of  St.  Luke's  Gospel  we  find  certain 
indications  that  he  was  not  conscious  of  being  an  inspired 
writer.  In  such  books  as  these  therefore  there  is  no  intrinsic 
note  to  compel  us  to  accept  them  as  divine.  It  is  a  generally 
accepted  truth  by  Catholic  theologians  that  the  author's 
consciousness  of  his  inspiration  enters  not  into  the  essential 
constituents  of  inspiration ;  but  is  of  the  nature  of  an  acces- 
sory. Card.  Franzelin  declares:  "As  in  the  prophetic  im- 
pulse to  speak  which  St.  Thomas,  2.  2.  173.  a.  4,  and 
other  theologians  distinguish  from  complete  prophecy, 
(Cfr.  Aug.  Genes,  ad  litt.  Lib.  III.  n.  37.),  thus  also  in  the 
inspiration  to  write  it  seems  not  essential  that  a  man  be 
conscious  of  his  inspiration;  nevertheless  it  should  not  be 
readily  admitted  that  de  facto  any  of  our  inspired  writers 
was  ignorant  of  his  inspiration"  (De  Div.  Trad,  et  Script, 
p.  358.)  In  a  note  in  the  same  place  he  declares  that  it  is 
not  proven  that  any  of  our  inspired  writers  was  ignorant  of 
his  inspiration.  Crets  (De  Div.  Bib.  Insp.  Lovanii,  1886)  and 
Pesch  (De  Insp.  Script.,  1906)  are  of  the  same  opinion. 

It  seems  far  more  probable  to  us  to  hold  that  some  were 
not  conscious  of  their  inspiration.  The  case  of  the  writer 
of  the  Second  Book  of  Maccabees  is  perhaps  the  clearest 
instance.  Since  all  admit  that  this  consciousness  in  no  way 
pertains  to  the  essence  of  inspiration  it  seems  that  it  should 
not  be  asserted  of  a  book  unless  there  be  some  evidences  of 
its  existence.     No  such  evidences  are  found  there.     But 


REVELATION   AND   ITS   CRITERION  5 

waiving  this  question  of  fact,  our  main  position  is  established 
that  divine  revelation  has  not  in  itself  the  power  of  making 
itself  authentically  known  to  man.  Even  if  the  inspired 
agent  .were  conscious  of  his  inspiration,  an  examination  of  the 
issue  will  convince  us  that  the  testimony  of  the  inspired 
agent,  unsupported  by  the  corroborative  attestation  of  God, 
is  not  sufficient.  In  the  first  place,  this  means  would  be 
subject  to  hallucination,  error,  and  fraud.  Long  would  be 
the  list  of  those  who,  from  one  or  other  of  these  motives, 
claimed  inspiration  from  God.  It  would  suffice  to  mention 
Muhammad  and  the  founder  of  Mormonism,  to  specify  the 
weakness  of  this  criterion.  But  granted  that  the  inspired 
agent  did,  in  any  case,  so  testify  as  to  merit  credence,  the 
faith  that  these  motives  of  credibility  would  produce  would 
not  be  divine  faith,  which  has  for  its  formal  motive  the 
authority  of  God ;  but,  at  most,  it  would  be  only  human  faith ; 
for  the  efiPect  cannot  be  greater  than  the  cause;  and,  as  the 
cause  of  this  credibility  was  not  divine  but  human,  the  faith, 
its  effect,  would  be  no  more  than  human  faith.  Now  it  is 
exacted  that  we  believe  in  the  Scriptures  with  a  divine  faith. 
Hence,  granted  that  the  testimony  of  the  inspired  writer 
might  be  trustworthy  of  itself,  it  could  never  produce  more 
than  himian  credibility,  which  is  not  sufficient  to  form  a  basis 
for  absolute  and  divine  faith.  No  creature  can  be  trusted 
infinitely,  but,  when  we  are  dealing  with  "God's  epistle  to 
his  creature,"  absolute  trust  and  certainty  are  required.  It 
was  fitting  that  an  all-provident  God  should  provide  man 
with  this  means  of  certitude,  and  we  believe  that  he  has 
done  so,  and  these  considerations  are  leading  us  to  investi- 
gate and  establish  it.  The  Prophets  and  Apostles  merited 
divine  faith  for  what  they  taught,  because  they,  by  miracles, 
established  their  divine  commission  to  teach.  In  such  case, 
this  faith  was  rendered  divine  by  the  corroborative  attesta- 
tion of  God  through  these  miracles.  But  how  shall  man 
always  and  in  every  case  be  able  to  discriminate  between 
the  divine  writings  and  books  of  purely  human  origin  ?  The 
Prophets  are  gone,  the  Apostles  are  gone;  their  writings 
have  undergone  great  vicissitudes.  ''We  live  amid  the  dust 
of  systems  and  of  creeds."     In  this  remote  age,  is  there  any 


6  REVELATION   AND   ITS   CRITERION 

adequate  criterion,  in  virtue  of  which  man  can  say,  This  book 
is  of  God,  and  this  other  is  not?  Were  there  not,  God  would 
not  have  sufficiently  provided  for  man ;  he  would  no  longer 
be  the  Heavenly  Father. 

Men,  who  still  believe  in  a  personal  God,  and  a  definite 
form  of  religion,  generally  admit  that  some  such  criterion 
must  exist,  but  differ  widely  in  defining  it. 

We  do  not  deny  that  internal  evidences  are  a  partial 
criterion ;  but  it  is  not  a  universal  criterion  for  all  the  books. 
For  instance  there  are  many  places  in  the  New  Testament 
where  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament  are  cited  as  Holy 
Scripture.  These  explicit  quotations  are  in  number  about 
three  hundred,  and  there  are  many  more  allusions  of  less 
proving  force.  The  citation  of  a  book  of  the  Old  Testament 
by  Christ  or  any  inspired  writer  of  the  New  Testament  as 
Holy  Scripture  is  a  subsidiary  criterion  of  inspiration ;  but  it 
is  not  an  adequate  and  sufficient  criterion,  since  it  does  not 
establish  a  complete  list  of  the  books.  Not  to  mention  the 
deuterocanonical  books,  there  is  no  mention  in  the  New 
Testament  of  Ruth,  Ezra,  Nehemiah,  Esther,  the  Canticle 
of  Canticles,  Obadiah,  Nahum,  Zephaniah,  and  Ecclesiastes : 
Ezekiel  is  only  faintly  alluded  to.  Therefore  the  testimony 
of  the  New  Testament  is  neither  complete  nor  exclusive; 
but  only  a  positive  proof  of  some  books. 

A  text  often  used  to  prove  the  internal  evidences  of  in- 
spiration in  the  Scriptures  themselves  is  taken  from  Second 
Epistle  of  St.  Paul  to  Timothy  HI.  i6.  The  passage,  accord- 
ing to  the  Greek  is  as  follows :  "  11  a<ra  <ypa<f>r]  OeoirvevaTo^;  koI 
dy^eXifio'i  tt/jo?  hihaaKoXCav^  Trpob  eXey^ov^  tt/oo?  iiravopOayaLV^ 
Trpbf;  iraiheCav  t^i'  ev  BLKatoavvrj.^^ 

The  Vulgate  renders  the  passage:  **Omnis  scriptura 
divinitus  inspirata  utilis  est  ad  docendum,  ad  arguendum, 
ad  corripiendum,  ad  erudiendum  in  justitia."  The  Roman 
Catholic  version  is  in  accord  with  the  Vulgate:  **A11  Scrip- 
ture inspired  of  God  is  profitable  to  teach,  to  reprove,  to 
correct,  to  instruct  in  justice."  It  is  evident  from  a  scrutiny 
of  the  Greek  text  that  the  Vulgate  does  not  adequately  repro- 
duce it.  No  account  is  taken  in  such  version  of  the  /cat, 
which  however  appears  in  all  the  best  codices.      The  Vulgate 


REVELATION   AND   ITS   CRITERION  7 

expunging  KaC,  would  virtually  insert  the  elliptical  eo-rt, 
after  a)(/)eXt/io?,  thus  making  deoirvevaro^  a  qualifying  char- 
acteristic, warranting  the  predication  of  ft)</>€\ifto9,  of  Traca 
'ypa<j>rj.  By  the  expunging  of  the  important  particle  /cat,  such 
sense  can  be  gleaned  from  this  passage;  but,  retaining  such 
conjunction,  whose  presence  rests  upon  the  best  data,  I  am 
at  a  loss  to  understand  how  they  gather  the  meaning.  More- 
over, the  context  and  parallel  passages  demand  the  sense 
which  results  from  the  retaining  of  the  particle. 

Of  all  the  versions,  the  Ethiopic  comes  closest  to  the 
original.  According  to  the  Latin  translation  of  the  Ethiopic 
text  by  Walton,  it  is  as  follows:  **Et  tota  scriptura  per 
Spiritum  Dei  est,  et  prodest  in  omni  doctrina  et  eruditione 
ad  corrigendum  et  instruendum  in  veritate."  Although 
this  ancient  and  valued  text  departs  somewhat  from  the 
verbally  literal  translation,  it  reproduces  the  full  sense. 
We  could  perhaps  literally  translate  the  Greek :  "All  Scrip- 
ture is  divinely  inspired  and  useful  to  teach,  to  reprove,  to 
correct,  to  instruct  in  righteousness."  Thus  it  is  in  con- 
formity with  the  Greek  reading,  with  the  Ethiopic,  with 
the  context,  with  other  parallel  passages,  and  with  some 
of  the  best  of  the  Fathers.  We  may  instance  one  parallel 
passage:     II.  Pet.  I.  20 — 21. 

We  think  then  that  this  sense  is  sufficiently  evidenced  so 
as  to  become  practically  certain.  The  passage  thus  be- 
comes a  direct  testimony  for  the  influence  of  God  on  Holy 
Scripture.  Indeed,  Paul's  motive  is  to  induce  Timothy  to 
entertain  a  divine  regard  for  the  Holy  Writ;  and  for  this 
reason  he  brings  forward  as  a  proof  the  divine  element  in  all 
Scripture.  It  is  not  then  a  discriminative,  conditional 
proposition,  but  a  plain  assertion  of  the  authorship  of  God 
in  the  Holy  Scripture.  But  this  clear  text  may  not  be 
adduced  with  any  profit  as  a  criterion;  because,  first  of  all, 
it  is,  as  Perrone  says,  begging  the  question  to  prove  the  divin- 
ity of  the  Holy  Books  from  their  own  testimony.  It  is  the 
circulus  vitiosus.  Again,  even  to  those  who  grant  the  divine 
authority  of  the  Epistle  to  Timothy,  it  only  avails  to  prove 
the  impress  of  the  hand  of  God  on  Holy  Scripture  in  a  general 
way,  but  does  not  distinguish  book  from  book,  or  form  any 


8  LUTHER   ON   INSPIRATION 

judgment  concerning  an  official  catalogue.  We  grant  then 
that  the  text,  as  well  as  others  of  a  similar  nature,  operates 
to  prove  the  divine  impulse  of  the  Holy  Ghost  on  Scripture 
in  general,  provided  we  once  have  received  as  granted  that 
these  books  are  of  God;  but  we  deny  to  all  such  texts  any 
value  to  discern  canonical  from  uncanonical  books. 

It  is  not  conformable  to  the  scope  of  this  book  to  follow 
the    progress  of  protestantism  through  all  its  changes  and 
vagaries.      We  see  in  it  a  constant  tendency  to  limit  the 
divine  element  in  the  Holy  Scriptures.     All  the  protest  ant 
sects  began  with  an  exaggerated  notion  of  the  nature  of  the 
Scriptures.     In  the  beginning  Luther  seems  not   to  have 
formulated   any  theory  of  inspiration.     He  accepted  the 
general  principles  then  held  by  the  Church  from  which  he 
seceded,  that  God  is  the  author  of  Holy  Scripture,  that  the 
inspired    writers  are  God's  instruments,  that  the  inspired 
writers  had  received    an  impulse  from  the  Holy  Ghost  to 
write  the  words  and  the  truths,  and  that  the  Holy  Scriptures 
are  the  i'nfallible  word  of  God,  not  only  in  matters  of  faith  and 
morals,  but  also  in  other  things,  and  are  free  from  error,  etc. 
But  having  once  thrown  off  subjection  to  authority,  with  his 
characteristic  genius  of  audacity,  he  formulated  new  theories 
to  meet  every  emergency  in  his  inconsistent  heresy.     Luther's 
opinions  present  many  contradictions,  and  his  defenders  are 
divided  against  themselves.      Speaking  of  his  audacious  at- 
titude toward  Holy  Scripture,   Kier  (Bedarf  es  einer  beson- 
dern  Inspirationslehre  ?  1891,  8)  cites  Luther  as  a  proof  that 
there  is  no  need  of  any  fixed  theory  of  inspiration,  and  de- 
clares of  him :    "Of  Luther  the  greatest  scriptural  theologian, 
well  known  is  his  remarkably  free  judgment,  not  alone  con- 
cerning St.  James,  but  also  concerning  the  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews,  some  of  the  Prophets,  and  St.  Paul.     He  read  the 
Bible  as  a  free  blessed  child  of  God."     This  freedom  moved 
him    to  reject  according  to  his  caprice  whatever  did  not 
please  his  humor.      When  the  Holy  Scriptures  pleased  him, 
he  extolled  them  above  all  other  things :    "  But  I,  against  the 
sayings  of  the  fathers,  of  men,  of  angels,  of  demons,  set  up 
not  ancient  usage,  not  a  multitude  of  men,  but  the  word  of 
the  one  eternal  Majesty,  which  they  are  forced  to  approve. 


LUTHER   ON   INSPIRATION  9 

'This  is  the  work  of  God,  not  of  us.  Here  I  stand ;  here  I 
sit ;  here  I  remain ;  here  I  glory ;  here  I  triumph ;  here  I  insult 
papists,  Thomists,  Henricists,  sophists,  and  all  the  gates  of 
Hell,  and  also  the  sayings  of  men  even  though  holy,  and 
erring  custom.  God's  word  is  above  all;  God's  power  so 
strengthens  me  that  I  should  not  care  if  a  thousand  Augus- 
tines,  a  thousand  Cyprians,  a  thousand  Henrician  Churches 
were  opposed  to  me."  (Contra  Henricum  regem.  Opera  Lat. 
Ed.  Franc.  VI.  437.) 

But  when  the  papists  urged  against  him  the  Scriptures, 
he  repudiates  the  Scriptures:  'Thou  urgest  forward  the 
slave,  that  is  the  Scriptures,  artd  not  the  entire  Scriptures, 
nor  their  better  part,  but  certain  places  concerning  works. 
I  leave  this  slave  to  you;  I  urge  forward  the  Lord,  who  is 
the  King  of  the  Scriptures,  who  became  to  me  my  merit,  and 
the  price  of  my  justification  and  salvation.  Him  I  hold;  to 
him  I  cleave,  and  leave  to  thee  works,  which  however  thou 
never  hast  done,"      (Comment,  in  Galat.  HI.  lo.) 

*'  I  care  nothing  for  these.  Do  thou  ever  urge  on  the 
slave ;  I  am  bold  in  the  Lord,  who  is  Lord  and  King  over  the 
Scriptures.  I  ask  not  concerning  all  the  sayings  of  Scripture, 
even  though  thou  bringest  more  against  me,  for  I  have  on 
my  side  the  Master  and  Lord  of  the  Scriptures." 

The  arch  deceiver  sets  at  variance  with  the  Lord  the 
message  of  God  himself,  and  with  marvelous  arrogance  begs 
the  question.  To  the  candid  student  of  history,  Luther 
must  ever  appear  as  a  clever  sophist,  who,  having  thrown 
off  all  real  belief  in  religion,  played  upon  the  ignorance, 
superficiality  and  credulity  of  the  people. 

Against  the  Sacramentarians  Luther  declared  that  one 
tittle  of  the  Scriptures  was  greater  than  the  heavens  and  the 
earth;  but  in  another  mood  he  rejected  Scriptures  which 
pleased  not  his  caprice:  "Finally  St.  John's  Gospel,  and 
First  Epistle,  St.  Paul's  Epistles,  especially  the  Romans, 
to  the  Galatians,  and  that  to  the  Ephesians,  and  St.  Peter's 
First  Epistle  are  the  books  which  present  to  thee  Christ  and 
all  things  which  are  necessary  and  saving,  even  though 
thou  never  see  or  hear  another  book  or  doctrine.  There- 
fore James'  Epistle  compared  to  these  is  verily  a  letter  of 


10  LUTHER    ON   INSPIRATION 

straw,  because  it  has  not  in  itself  the  Gospel  spirit. ' '  (Welches 
die  rechten  und  edlisten  Biicher  des  N.  T.  sind;  LXIII.  115.) 

Of  the  Apocalypse  of  St.  John,  Luther  declared:  ''In 
this  book  I  leave  every  one  to  his  own  opinion,  and  I  ask 
no  one  to  accept  my  opinion  or  judgment.  I  speak  what  I 
feel.  Many  things  are  wanting  in  this  book,  which  move  me 
to  hold  it  as  neither  apostolic  nor  prophetic.  My  spirit  is 
not  drawn  to  the  book,  and  a  sufficient  cause  why  I  esteem 
the  book  no  higher  is  that  in  it  Christ  is  neither  taught  nor 
acknowledged,  a  thing  which  first  of  all  an  apostle  should 
do."  (Vorrede  zur  Offenbarung  St.  Johannis,  LXIII.  169  et 
seqq.) 

According  to  Luther,  "Ecclesiastes  should  be  more  com- 
plete; much  has  been  excised  from  it;  it  has  neither  boots 
nor  spurs,  but  rides  in  socks,  as  I  was  wont  to  do  when  still 
in  the  cloister."  (Tischreden  2261,  2262;  Ed.  Erlang.  LXII. 
127— 131.) 

The  genius  of  Luther  pervades  all  protestantism,  a  false 
freedom,  a  subjectivism,  and  illogical  sentiment alism. 

Well  does  Rabaud  declare  of  Luther:  ''His  principle  of 
critique  was  purely  subjective:  from  the  intensity  with 
which  Christ  is  preached  he  determined  the  inspiration  and 
canonicity  of  a  book.  Is  not  this  to  abolish  the  authority  of 
the  Bible,  and  to  substitute  in  its  stead  the  individual  con- 
science? Who  shall  determine  the  degree  of  faithfulness  of 
the  inspired  writer?  Who  shall  judge  the  purety  of  his 
doctrine?  Who  shall  say  if  Christ  is  preached  as  it  be- 
hooveth?  This  principle,  in  appearance  more  practical,  but 
in  reality  equally  as  subjective  as  the  principles  of  the  other 
leaders  of  the  Reformation  led  to  the  same  result,  the  author- 
ity of  the  individual  conscience,  a  theology  read  out  of  the 
Bible.  Luther  furnished  the  first  and  most  remarkable  ex- 
ample. By  his  audacious  critique  and  his  independence  in 
regard  to  the  exterior  Scriptures,  he  placed  the  germs  of  the 
subsequent  objections  which  were  to  shatter  and  ruin  the 
doctrine  of  inspiration,  which  in  common  with  his  con- 
temporaries Luther  held,  but  which  he  admitted  only  in 
the  passages  in  harmony  with  his  theology,  or  his  reHgious 


RATIONALISTIC   THEORIES  11 

sense."  (Histoire  de  la  doctrine  de  I'mspiration  des  S. 
Ecritures  dans  les  pays  de  langue  frangaise,  Paris,  1883,  39.) 

The  seed  of  rationalism  which  Luther  sowed  has  pro- 
duced dreadful  fruit.  All  protestantism  has  became  ration- 
alistic. In  our  own  country  no  protestant  theologian  ac- 
cepts the  Bible  as  the  infallible  w^ord  of  God.  In  the  protest- 
ant church  in  America  as  soon  as  a  man  propounds  some 
audacious  heresy  he  is  made  a  hero.  Protestant  Germany 
is  thoroughly  rationalistic.  Cardinal  Manning  had  to  de- 
plore the  drift  of  non-Catholic  thought  in  England : 

*'It  is  therefore,  no  new  thing  in  the  history  of  the  Church, 
nor,  indeed,  in  the  history  of  England  since  the  Reformation. 
From  the  Deistical  writers  down  to  Thomas  Paine,  there  has 
never  wanted  a  succession  of  critics  and  objectors  who  have 
assailed  the  extrinsic  or  intrinsic  authority  of  Holy  Scrip- 
ture. 

''So  far  it  is  no  new  thing.  But  in  one  aspect,  indeed,  it  is 
altogether  new.  It  is  new  to  find  this  form  of  scepticism 
put  forth  by  writers  of  eminence  for  dignity  and  personal 
excellence,  and  mental  cultivation,  in  the  Church  of  England ; 
by  men,  too,  who  still  profess  not  only  a  faith  in  Christianity, 
but  fidelity  to  the  Anglican  Church.  Hitherto  these  forms 
of  sceptical  unbelief  have  worked  outside  the  Church  of 
England,  and  in  hostility  against  it.  Now  they  are  within, 
and  professing  to  be  of  it,  and  to  serve  it.  Unpalatable  as 
the  truth  may  be,  it  is  certain  that  a  Rationalistic  school 
imported  from  Germany  has  established  itself  within  the 
Church  of  England ;  that  its  writers  are  highly  respectable 
and  cultivated  men,  and  that  though  they  may  be  few,  yet 
the  influence  of  their  opinions  is  already  widely  spread,  and 
that  a  very  general  sympathy  with  them  already  extends 
itself  among  the  laity  of  the  Anglican  Church.  This  is 
certainly  a  phenomenon  altogether  new. 

"Before  entering  upon  the  subject  of  this  chapter,  it 
would  seem,  therefore,  to  be  seasonable  to  examine  briefly 
the  present  state  of  the  subject  of  Inspiration  in  the  Church 
of  England,  and  contrast  with  it  the  teaching  of  the  Catholic 
Church  upon  this  point. 


12 


RATIONALISTIC   THEORIES 


*'And  first,  as  to  the  doctrine  of  the  Church  of  England 
on  Inspiration,  it  is  to  be  remembered  that  though  the  Canon 
of  Scripture  was  altered  by  the  Anglican  Reformation,  the 
subject  of  inspiration  was  hardly  discussed.  The  traditional 
teaching  of  the  Catholic  Theology,  with  its  various  opinions, 
were  therefore  passively  retained.  The  earlier  writers,  such 
as  Hooker,  repeat  the  traditional  formulas  respecting  the  in- 
spiration and  veracity  of  Holy  Scripture.  Hooker's  words 
are,  'He  (that  is,  God)  so  employed  them  (the  Prophets)  in 
this  heavenly  work,  that  they  neither  spake  nor  wrote  a 
word  of  their  own,  but  uttered  syllable  by  syllable  as  the 
Spirit  put  it  into  their  mouths.  '*  Such  was  more  or  less  the 
tone  of  the  chief  Anglican  writers  for  a  century  after  the 
Reformation. 

"Perhaps  the  best  example  of  the  Anglican  teaching  on 
the  subject  will  be  found  in  Whitby's  general  Preface  to  his 
'Paraphrase  of  the  Gospels.'  His  opinion  is  as  follows.  He 
begins  by  adopting  the  distinction  of  the  Jewish  Church 
between  the  'Prophets'  and  the  'Chetubin,'  or  holy  writers, 
and  therefore  between  the  'inspiration  of  suggestion'  and  the 
'inspiration  of  direction.' 

"He  then  lays  down — 

"i.  First,  that  where  there  was  no  antecedent  knowl- 
edge of  the  matter  to  be  written,  an  inspiration  of  suggestion 
was  vouchsafed  to  the  Apostles ;  but  that  where  such  knowl- 
edge did  antecedently  exist,  there  was  only  an  inspiration 
exciting  them  to  write  such  matters,  and  directing  them 
in  the  writing  so  as  to  preclude  all  error. 

"2.  Secondly,  that  in  writing  those  things  which  were 
not  antecedently  known  to  them,  either  by  natural  reason 
including  education,  or  previous  revelation — e.g.  the  Incarn- 
ation, the  vocation  of  the  Gentiles,  the  apostasy  of  the 
latter  times,  the  prophecies  of  the  Apocalypse — they  had  an 
immediate  suggestion  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 

"3 .  Thirdly,  that  in  all  other  matters  they  were  directed 
so  as  to  preclude  error,  and  to  confirm  the  truth  whether 
by  illumination  in  the  meaning  of  the  previous  revelation, 
or  by  reasoning. 

*  Works,  Vol.  III.  p.  62.  Ed.  Keble. 


RATIONALISTIC   THEORIES  13 

"4.  Fourthly,  that  in  the  historical  parts  of  the  New 
Testament  they  were  directed  in  all  that  is  necessary  to  the 
truth  of  the  facts  related,  but  not  as  to  the  order  or  accesso- 
ries of  such  events,  unless  these  things  affected  the  truth  of 
the  facts. 

**5.  Fifthly,  that  in  relating  the  words  or  discourses  of 
our  Lord  and  of  others,  they  were  directed  so  as  to  preclude 
all  error  as  to  the  substance,  but  not  so  as  to  reproduce  the 
words. 

"6.  Lastly,  that  the  inspiration  or  divine  assistance  of 
the  sacred  writers  was  such  as  'will  assure  us  of  the  truth  of 
what  they  write,  whether  by  inspiration  of  suggestion,  or 
direction  only,  but  not  such  as  w^ould  imply  that  their  very 
words  were  dictated,  or  their  phrases  suggested  to  them, 
by  the  Holy  Ghost.* 

"In  Bishop  Burnet  may  be  seen  a  somewhat  less  ex- 
plicit tone.  He  says,  The  laying  down  a  scheme  that  asserts 
an  immediate  inspiration,  which  goes  to  the  style,  and  to 
every  tittle,  and  that  denies  any  error  to  have  crept  into  any 
of  the  copies,  as  it  seems  on  the  one  hand  to  raise  the  honor 
of  Scripture  very  highly,  so  it  lies  open  on  the  other  hand 
to  great  difficulties,  which  seem  insuperable  on  that  hypo- 
thesis.'f. 

"Such  was  the  current  teaching  of  the  most  respectable 
class  of  Anglican  divines,  men  of  true  learning  and  of  sound 
judgment,  in  the  best  century  of  the  Church  of  England. 
But  I  need  quote  no  more.  Let  us  now  examine  one  or  two 
of  the  modem  opinions  on  the  same  subject. 

"A  member  of  the  University  of  Oxford  writes  as  follows : 
— The  Bible  is  none  other  than  the  voice  of  Him  that  sitteth 
upon  the  throne.  Every  book  of  it,  every  chapter  of  it, 
every  verse  of  it,  every  word  of  it,  every  syllable  of  it,  every 
letter  of  it,  is  the  direct  utterance  of  the  Most  High. 'J  A 
member  of  Trinity  College,  Dublin,  writes  as  follows : — The 

*  Whitby's  Para-phrase,  Gen.  Pref.  p.  5-7.  Ed,  London,  1844. 


t  Burnet,  Exposition  of  the  Thirty-nine  Articles,  p.  117.     Ed.  Oxford. 


X  Burgon,  Inspiration  and  Interpretation  of  Holy  Scripture,  p.  89,  quoted 
by  Dr.  Colenso,  Part  I.  p.  6.  . 


14  RATIONALISTIC   THEORIES 

Opinion  that  the  subject-matter  alone  of  the  Bible  proceeded 
from  the  Holy  Spirit,  while  its  language  was  left  to  the 
unaided  choice  of  the  various  writers,  amounts  to  that  fan- 
tastic notion  which  is  the  grand  fallacy  of  many  theories  of 
Inspiration;  namely,  that  two  different  spiritual  agencies 
were  in  operation,  one  of  which  produced  the  phraseology 
in  its  outward  form,  while  the  other  created  within  the  soul 
the  conceptions  and  thoughts  of  which  such  phraseology 
was  the  expression.  The  Holy  Spirit,  on  the  contrary,  as 
the  productive  principle,  embraces  the  entire  activity  of 
those  whom  He  inspires,  rendering  their  language  the  word 
of  God.  The  entire  substance  and  form  of  Scripture,  whether 
resulting  from  revelation  or  natural  knowledge,  are  thus 
blended  together  into  one  harmonious  whole.'*  Once  more. 
Dr.  Arnold  writes  as  follows :  'An  inspired  work  is  supposed 
to  mean  a  work  to  which  God  has  communicated  His  own 
perfections ;  so  that  the  slightest  error  or  defect  of  any  kind 
in  it  is  inconceivable,  and  that  which  is  other  than  perfect  in 
all  points  cannot  be  inspired.  This  is  the  unwarrantable 
interpretation  of  the  word  Inspiration.  .  .  .  Surely 
many  of  our  words  and  many  of  our  actions  are  spoken  and 
done  by  the  inspiration  of  God's  Spirit.  .  .  .  Yet  does 
the  Holy  Spirit  so  inspire  us  as  to  communicate  to  us  His 
own  perfections?  Are  our  best  works  or  words  utterly  free 
from  error  or  from  sinP'f  Mr.  Jowett,  in  his  well-known 
Essay  on  the  'Interpretation  of  Scripture,'  after  reciting  the 
commonly-received  theories  of  inspiration,  proceeds  as  fol- 
lows:— 'Nor  for  any  of  the  higher  or  supernatural  views  of 
Inspiration  is  there  any  foundation  in  the  Gospels  or  Epistles. 
There  is  no  appearance  in  their  writings  that  the  Evangelists 
or  Apostles  had  any  inward  gift,  or  were  subject  to  any 
power  external  to  them  different  from  that  of  preaching  or 
teaching  which  they  daily  exercised ;  nor  do  they  anywhere 
lead  us  to  suppose  that  they  were  free  from  error  or  infirmity. 
.     .     The  nature  of  Inspiration  can  only  be  known  from 

*  Lee  on  the  Inspiration  of  the  Holy  Scripture,  pp.  32,  33, 


t  Arnold's  Sermons,  quoted  by  Stanley,  The  Bible,  its  Form,  and  its  Sub- 
stance, Preface,  VII.  VIII.  IX. 


RATIONALISTIC   THEORIES  15 

the  examination  of  Scripture.  There  is  no  other  source  to 
which  we  can  turn  for  information ;  and  we  have  no  right  to 
assume  some  imaginary  doctrine  of  Inspiration  like  the  in- 
falHbility  of  the  Roman  CathoHc  Church.  To  the  question, 
What  is  Inspiration?  the  first  answer  therefore  is,  That  idea 
of  Scripture  which  we  gather  from  the  knowledge  of  it.  '*  Dr. 
Williams  says,  *In  the  Bible,  as  an  expression  of  devout  rea- 
son, and  therefore  to  be  read  with  reason  in  freedom,  he 
[Bunsen]  finds  a  record  of  the  spiritual  giants  whose  ex- 
perience generated  the  religious  atmosphere  we  breathe.' 

*'I  do  not  undertake  to  do  more  than  recite  these  opinions 
of  clergymen  of  the  Church  of  England.  It  is  not  for  us  to 
say  what  is  the  authoritative  doctrine  of  that  body;  but  it 
has  been  recently  declared  by  the  highest  Ecclesiastical 
tribunal,  that  the  views  of  Inspiration  last  given  are  not 
inconsistent  with  the  Anglican  formularies.  Dr.  Lushing- 
ton  expressed  himself  as  follows : — *As  to  the  liberty  of  the 
Anglican  clergy  to  examine  and  determine  the  text  of  Scrip- 
ture, I  exceedingly  .  .  .  doubt  if  this  liberty  can  be 
extended  beyond  the  limits  I  have  mentioned,  namely, 
certain  verses  or  parts  of  Scripture.  I  think  it  could  not  be 
permitted  to  a  clergyman  to  reject  the  whole  of  one  of  the 
books  of  Scripture.'! 

**It  is  evident  from  the  above  quotations  that  the  theory 
of  Inspiration  among  many  prominent  men  in  the  Anglican 
Church  has  been  moving  in  the  direction  of  the  German 
Neology:"  (Temporal  Mission  of  the  Holy  Ghost  pp.  138 — 
145.) 

The  tendency  deplored  by  Manning  has  continued  until 
now  in  protestant  thought  the  Bible  is  a  very  secondary 
thing. 

**Dr.  Driver,  canon  of  Christchurch,  Oxford,  in  his  work 
on  the  'Literature  of  the  Old  Testament,'  quotes  with 
approval  the  following  words  of  Professor  Sanday,  in  regard 
to  inspiration : 

*  Essays  and  Reviews,  pp.  345,  347. 


t  Judgment — Bishop  of  Salisbury  versus  Williams,  p.  i6. 


16  RATIONALISTIC   THEORIES 

^'  'In  all  that  relates  to  the  revelation  of  God  and  of  His 
Will,  the  writers  of  the  Bible  assert  for  themselves  a  definite 
inspiration ;  they  claim  to  speak  with  an  authority  higher  than 
their  own.  But  with  regard  to  the  narration  of  events,  and 
to  processes  of  literary  composition,  there  is  nothing  so 
exceptional  about  them  as  to  exempt  them  from  the  con- 
ditions to  which  other  works  would  be  exposed  at  the  same 
time  and  place.'  "     Dub.  Review,  1893,  p.  533. 

Driver  himself  declares  that,  "applied  to  the  Bible,  as  a 
whole,  the  expression  'Word  of  God'  seems  to  savour  of  the 
old  theor}"  of  inspiration,  which  no  one  now  cares  to  maintain y 
(Driver's  Sermons  on  the  Old  Test.  p.  158.) 

''But  it  may  be  said :  These  are  the  opinions  of  individ- 
ual Anglicans;  men  of  influence  and  learning  no  doubt,  but 
still  only  individuals ;  they  do  not  necessarily  represent  the 
formal  teaching  of  the  Church.  What  is  the  attitude  of  the 
bishops  on  this  important  question  ?  What  is  the  view  of  the 
ecclesia  docens  on  inspiration  .f*' 

''One  thing  may  safely  be  said:  a  remarkable  harmony 
pervades  their  lordships'  words  on  the  subject.  Whether 
their  teaching  is  likely  to  throw  much  light  on  the  matter, 
we  leave  our  readers  to  decide  from  the  few  specimens  we 
adduce.  'We  heartily  concur  with  the  majority  of  our 
opponents,'  says  the  Bishop  of  Gloucester,  in  'Aids  to 
Faith,'  p.  404,  'in  rejecting  all  theories  of  inspiration.' 
'Our  Church,'  says  Bishop  Thirlwall,  charge  for  1863,  'has 
never  attempted  to  determine  the  nature  of  the  inspiration 
of  sacred  Scriptures.'  'If  you  ask  me,'  writes  Dr.  Cotton, 
Bishop  of  Calcutta,  'for  a  precise  theory  of  Inspiration,  I 
confess  I  can  only  urge  you  to  repudiate  all  theories;  to 
apply  to  theology  the  maxim  which  guided  Newton  in 
philosophy,  hypotheses  non  fingo.'  Finally,  to  take  one 
more  instance,  the  Bishop  of  Winchester  writes:  'It  seems 
pretty  generally  agreed,  that  definite  theories  of  inspiration 
are  doubtful  and  dangerous."     (Manning,  op.  cit.) 

When  Dr.  Frederick  Temple  was  appointed  Anglican 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury  many  took  the  appointment  as  a 
total  surrender  by  the  Anglican  Church  to  the  spirit  of 
rationalism. 


RATIONALISTIC   THEORIES  17 

Mr.  Jesse  Locke  thus  speaks  of  Mr.  Temple's  theology: 

"What  sort  of  theology  has  been  enthroned  at  Canter- 
bury? What  idea  of  religion  does  he  hold  and  teach  who 
now  occupies  what  Anglicans  like  to  call  'the  chair  of  St. 
Augustine'  ?  Fortunately  for  our  inquiry  Dr  Temple's  views 
on  religion  are  easily  accessible.  He  was  the  first  essayist 
in  a  volume  published  in  1861,  and  entitled  'Essays  and  Re- 
views.' This  book  was  the  signal  for  a  blaze  of  controversy. 
Its  authors  were  clergymen  of  the  Church  of  England,  and 
its  teaching  was  the  frankest,  boldest  rationalism,  which 
emasculated  religion  of  the  supernatural,  and  reduced  it  to  a 
purely  humanitarian  basis.  Orthodox,  evangelical  protest- 
ants — pious  but  illogical — were  deeply  shocked.  A  few 
quotations  will  give  an  idea  of  what  the  essayist  taught  on 
some  important  subjects. 

"Dr.  Temple,  in  his  opening  essay.  The  Education  of  the 
World,'  plants  himself  squarely  on  that  fundamental  protest- 
ant  principle  of  which  rationalism  is  the  necessary  and  legiti- 
mate fruit.  The  ulitmate  basis  for  religion,  he  claims,  is  to 
be  found  only  in  that  'inner  voice'  which  should  guide  every 
man.  There  is  nothing  external  which  can  be  an  authority ; 
neither  is  the  church.  The  Bible, '  he  says, 'in  fact  is  hindered 
by  its  form  from  exercising  a  despotism  over  the  human 
spirit.  .  .  .  The  inner  voice  by  the  principle  of  private 
judgment  puts  conscience  between  us  and  the  Bible, 
making  conscience  the  supreme  interpreter,  whom  it  may  be 
a  duty  to  enlighten,  but  whom  it  can  never  be  a  duty  to  dis- 
obey ('Essays  and  Reviews,' p.  53).  Again:  'When  con- 
science and  the  Bible  appear  to  differ,  the  pious  Christian 
immediately  concludes  that  he  has  not  really  understood  the 
Bible.'  That  is,  his  private  judgment  is  certainly  right,  and 
the  Bible  must  be  made  to  conform  to  it !  This  reduces  re- 
ligion to  the  purest  individualism ;  makes  as  many  different 
religions  as  there  are  individuals  to  hold  them.  And  all  are 
equally  right !  Suppose  this  principle  applied  to  the  law  of 
the  land,  each  man  assuming  that  the  law  had  no  other  in- 
terpreter than  his  own  'inner  voice' !" 

Mr.  Locke  then  gives  us  a  number  of  quotations  from 
the  essays  of  other  writers  in  the  same  volume  of  "Essays 


18  RATIONALISTIC   THEORIES 

and  Reviews,"  and  though  the  ''usual  statement"  was  found 
in  the  preface,  to  the  effect  that  each  essayist  was  responsible 
for  his  own  essay  alone.  Dr.  Temple  has,  in  the  writer's 
judgment,  made  himself  responsible  for  the  views  of  these 
other  writers  by  his  failure  to  repudiate  them.  Some  of 
these  other  essayists  spoke  of  the  doctrine  of  inspiration  as 
''absurd,"  explained  away  the  Messianic  prophecies,  char- 
acterizing as  "distortion"  the  application  of  Isaiah's  prophe- 
cies to  the  Messiah,  and  upheld  the  idea  of  a  true  national 
church  as  one  that  should  include  all  the  people  of  the  nation, 
who  should  be  bom  into  membership  in  the  church  as  they 
are  bom  into  civil  rights.  Refering  to  Mr.  Temple's  Bamp- 
ton  lectures,  1884,  Mr.  Locke  writes: 

"As  to  miracles,  those  of  the  Old  Testament,  he  tells  us, 
could  never  be  proved.  'The  times  are  remote;  the  date 
and  authorship  of  the  books  are  not  established  with  cer- 
tainty ;  the  mixture  of  poetry  with  history  is  no  longer  cap- 
able of  any  sure  separation  into  its  parts'  (p.  206).  In  the 
New  Testament,  he  adds,  we  must  admit  that  some  unusual 
occurrences  took  place  which  struck  the  disciples  and  other 
observers  as  miracles,  though  they  need  not  necessarily  have 
been  miracles  'in  the  scientific  sense.'  'For  instance,  the 
miraculous  healing  of  the  sick  may  be  no  miracle  in  the 
strictest  sense  at  all.  It  may  be  but  an  instance  of  the 
power  of  mind  over  body,  a  power  which  is  undeniably  not 
yet  brought  within  the  range  of  science,  and  which  neverthe- 
less may  be  really  within  its  domain'  (p.  195).  Our  Lord's 
miracles  of  healing  may  have  been  simply  the  result  of  this 
power  and  'due  to  a  superiority  of  this  mental  power  to  the 
similar  power  possessed  by  other  men.  Men  seem  to  possess 
this  power  over  their  own  bodies  and  over  the  bodies  of 
others  in  different  degrees'  (p.  201).  Even  our  Lord's  resur- 
rection from  the  dead  is  reached  by  this  destructive  criticism. 
'Thus,  for  instance,  it  is  quite  possible  that  our  Lord's  resur- 
rection may  be  found  hereafter  to  be  no  miracle  at  all  in  the 
scientific  sense.  It  foreshadows  and  begins  the  general  resur- 
rection ;  when  that  general  resurrection  comes  we  may  find 
that  it  is,  after  all,  the  natural  issue  of  physical  laws  always 
at  work'  (p.  196). 


THE   PROTESTANT  CRITERION  19 

**If  we  ask,  What,  then,  can  be  the  object  of  miracles? 
Dr.  Temple  has  his  answer  ready.  If  these  events,  though 
not  really  miraculous,  have  'served  their  purpose,  if  they 
have  arrested  attention  which  would  not  otherwise  have 
been  arrested,  if  they  have  compelled  belief,'  then  they  have 
accomplished  their  true  end.  In  other  words,  they  were 
'pious  frauds'  impressing  a  people  naturally  credulous  and 
easily  deceived,  as  the  best  way  of  conveying  ethical  truth  to 
them.  The  protestant  tradition  persists  in  giving'  to  the 
Society  of  Jesus  the  possession  of  The  end  justifies  the 
means'  as  a  principle  of  conduct;  but  Dr.  Temple  goes  farther 
still,  and  carries  the  charge  back  from  His  faithful  servants  to 
the  great  Master  Himself!" 

For  these  views  of  the  new  archbishop,  says  Mr.  Locke, 
the  Anglican  Church  must  be  held  responsible,  since  it  has 
twice  passed  in  review  of  them  and  refused  to  condemn  either 
him  or  them,  and  has  now  received  him  as  its  head. 

In  May,  1904,  Professor  Marcus  Dods  of  New  College, 
Edinburgh,  delivered  a  course  of  lectures  before  Lake  Forest 
College,  111.  on  "The  Bible:  Its  Origin  and  Nature." 

In  his  lecture  on  the  Canon  of  Scripture  he  candidly 
declares : 

"If  you  ask  a  Romanist  why  he  accepts  certain  books  as 
canonical,  he  has  a  perfectly  intelligible  answer  ready.  He 
accepts  these  books  because  the  Church  bids  him  do  so. 
The  Church  has  determined  what  books  are  canonical,  and 
he  accepts  the  decision  of  the  Church.  If  you  ask  a  protest- 
ant why  he  believes  that  just  these  books  bound  up  together 
in  his  Bible  are  canonical,  and  neither  more  nor  fewer,  I 
fear  that  ninety-nine  protestants  out  of  a  hundred  could 
give  you  no  answer  that  would  satisfy  a  reasonable  man. 
The  protestant  scorns  the  Romanist  because  he  relies  on  the 
authority  of  the  Church,  but  he  cannot  tell  you  on  what 
authority  he  himself  relies.  The  protestant  watchword  is, 
"The  Bible,  the  whole  Bible,  and  nothing  but  the  Bible," 
but  how  many  protestants  are  there  who  could  make  it 
quite  clear  that  within  the  boards  of  their  Bible  they  have 
the  whole  Bible  and  nothing  but  the  Bible?  If  you  asked 
them  to  show  you  that  no  canonical  writing  has  been  omitted 


20  THE    PROTESTANT   CRITERION 

and  that  no  uncanonical  writing  has  been  received,  how  will 
they  proceed  to  do  so?  If  you  ask  the  average  protestant 
to  say  why  he  receives  the  second  Epistle  of  Peter,  which  a 
large  part  of  the  early  Church  declined  to  receive,  or  wh}^  he 
accepts  the  Epistle  of  James,  regarding  which  Luther  him- 
self was  more  than  doubtful, — what  can  he  say  but  that  the 
Church  to  which  he  belongs  receives  them?  In  other  words, 
what  is  the  difference  between  the  protestant  and  the  Ro- 
manist on  this  cardinal  point  of  canonicity  ?  Do  not  protest- 
ants  and  Romanists  alike  accept  their  canonical  books  at  the 
hands  of  the  Church?" 

After  reviewing  the  Catholic  position  superficially  he 
endeavors  to  establish  a  protestant  criterion  by  appealing 
to  the  direct  influence  of  God  upon  the  individual.  Luther 
is  his  hero : 

"There  w^ere  tw^o  questions  which  Luther  found  himself 
driven  to  answer:  What  assures  me  that  Scripture  is  the 
Word  of  God,  and  therefore  authoritative  ?  and,  What  books 
are  Scripture?  Prior  to  the  question,  What  is  the  Canon  of 
inspired  Scripture?  comes  the  question.  Is  there  an  inspired 
Scripture?  Prior  to  the  question.  What  writings  contain  the 
Word  of  God?  comes  the  question.  Is  there  a  Word  of  God? 
We  cannot  understand  Luther's  answer  to  the  one  question 
unless  we  recognize  his  attitude  toward  the  other. 

"Now,  according  to  Luther,  the  prior  question,  Is  there  a 
Word  of  God?  or.  Has  God  spoken?  is  answered  in  the  affirm- 
ative, and  with  certainty,  by  every  man  in  whom  the  Word 
of  God  attests  its  own  Divine  origin  and  authority,  and  it 
can  be  answered  with  an  assured  affirmative  by  none  beside. 
Luther's  explicit  and  constant  teaching  is  that  this  word  is 
self -evidencing,  and  needs  no  authority  at  its  back,  but  car- 
ries in  it  its  own  authentication.  Let  us  hear  some  of  his 
strong  statements  to  this  effect.  Showing  that  the  question 
between  himself  and  Rome  was  not  whether  God  was  to  be 
obeyed  when  he  spoke, — for  they  were  agreed  as  to  that, — 
he  goes  on:  'The  Romanists  say.  Yes,  but  how  can  we 
know  what  is  God's  word,  and  what  is  true  or  false?  We 
must  learn  it  from  the  Pope  and  the  Councils.  Very  well, 
let  them  decree  and  say  what  they  will,  still  say  I,  Thou 


THE   PROTESTANT   CRITERION  21 

can'st  not  rest  thy  confidence  thereon,  nor  satisfy  thy  con- 
science :  thou  must  thyself  decide,  thy  neck  is  at  stake,  thy 
life  is  at  stake.  Therefore  must  God  say  to  thee  in  thine 
heart.  This  is  God's  Word,  else  it  is  still  undecided. '  Again : 
'Thou  must  be  as  certain  that  it  is  the  Word  of  God  as  thou 
art  certain  that  thou  livest,  and  even  more  certain,  for  on 
this  alone  must  thy  conscience  rest.  And  even  if  all  men 
came,  even  the  angels  and  all  the  world,  and  determined 
something,  if  thou  can'st  not  form  nor  conclude  the  decision, 
thou  art  lost.  For  thou  must  not  place  thy  decision  on  the 
Pope  or  any  other,  thou  must  thyself  be  so  skilful  that  thou 
can'st  say,  God  says  this,  not  that;  this  is  right,  that  is 
wrong;  else  it  is  not  possible  to  endure.  Dost  thou  stand 
upon  Pope  or  Concilia  ?  Then  the  Devil  may  at  once  knock 
a  hole  in  thee  and  insinuate,  'How  if  it  were  false?  how  if 
they  have  erred?'  Then  thou  art  laid  low  at  once.  There- 
fore thou  must  bring  conscience  into  play,  that  thou  may'st 
boldly  and  defiantly  say,  That  is  God's  word;  on  that  will 
I  risk  body  and  life,  and  a  hundred  thousand  necks  if  I  had 
them.  Therefore  no  one  shall  turn  me  from  the  word 
which  God  teaches  me,  and  that  must  I  know  as  certainly 
as  that  two  and  three  make  five,  that  an  ell  is  longer  than  a 
half.  That  is  certain,  and  though  all  the  world  speak  to  the 
contrary,  still  I  know  that  it  is  not  otherwise.  Who  decides 
me  there?  No  man,  but  only  the  truth  which  is  so  perfectly 
certain  that  nobody  can  deny  it.' 

"Why  is  Luther  so  urgent  on  this  point?  He  is  urgent 
because  he  sees  that  the  whole  difference  between  himself 
and  Rome  hinges  here.  If  he  cannot  make  good  this  posi- 
tion, that  the  truth  or  the  Word  of  God  has  power  to  verify 
itself  as  such  to  the  conscience  it  awakens,  he  has  no  stand- 
ing at  all.  The  principle  which  made  him  a  protestant,  and 
which  constitutes  men  protestant s  always,  is  simply  this, 
that  the  soul  needs  not  the  intervention  of  any  authority  to 
bring  it  into  contact  with  God  and  the  truth,  but  that  God 
and  His  truth  have  power  to  verify  themselves  to  the  indi- 
vidual. Luther  did  not  accept  the  Gospel  because  it  was 
written  in  a  book  he  believed  to  be  inspired,  or  canonical,  or 
the  word  of  God ;  but  he  accepted  it  because  it  brought  new 


22  THE   PROTESTANT   CRITERION 

life  to  his  spirit  and  proved  itself  to  be  from  God.  He  did 
not  accept  Christ  because  he  had  first  of  all  accepted  the 
Scriptures,  but  he  accepted  the  Scriptures  because  they 
testified  of  a  Christ  he  felt  constrained  to  accept.  In  short, 
it  is  the  truth  which  the  Scriptures  contain  which  certify 
him  that  they  are  the  word  of  God ;  it  is  not  his  belief  that 
they  are  the  w^ord  of  God  which  certifies  him  of  the  truth 
they  contain.  The  proclamation  of  God's  grace  quickening 
a  new  life  within  him  convinced  him  this  proclamation  was 
from  God. 

'The  difference  between  the  Romanist  and  the  protest- 
ant  is  not  what  it  is  so  often  said  to  be,  that  the  Romanist 
accepts  the  Church  as  his  infallible  authority,  while  the 
protestant  accepts  the  Scriptures  as  his  infallible  authority. 
The  Romanist  equally  with  the  protestant  accepts  the  au- 
thority of  Scripture.  The  difference  lies  deeper.  The 
difference  lies  here :  that  the  Romanist  accepts  Scripture  as 
the  word  of  God  because  the  Church  tells  him  so,  the  protest- 
ant accepts  it  as  the  word  of  God  because  God  tells  him  so. 
The  protestant  believes  it  to  be  God's  word  because  through 
it  God  has  spoken  to  him  in  such  sort  as  to  convince  him 
that  it  is  God  who  here  speaks.  This  is  the  one  sure  founda- 
tion-stone of  protestantism, — the  response  of  the  individual 
conscience  to  the  self -evidencing  voice  of  God  in  Scripture. 
He  does  not  need  to  go  to  the  Church  to  ask  if  this  be  God's 
word ;  his  conscience  tells  him  it  is.  Deeper  than  that  for  a 
foundation  of  faith  you  cannot  get,  and  any  faith  that  is  not 
so  deeply  founded  is  insecure  — it  may  last,  and  it  may  bring 
a  man  to  all  needed  benefit,  but  it  is  not  reasonably  defensible, 
and  therefore  it  is  liable  to  be  upset. 

'This,  then,  was  Luther's  first  position  regarding  Scrip- 
ture ;  this  was  the  fundamental  position  on  which  protestant- 
ism is  reared;  viz.  that  through  Scripture  God  Himself  so 
speaks  to  the  soul  that  the  man  is  convinced  without  the 
intervention  of  any  other  proof  or  authority  that  this  is  the 
word  of  God.  The  individual  does  not  need  the  Church  to 
tell  him  that  this  is  the  word  of  God.  God  tells  him  so,  and 
makes  all  other  authority  superfluous. 


THE    PROTESTANT   CRITERION  23 

''But  next  comes  the  question,  What  writings  contain 
this  word?  Are  we  to  carry  through  this  fundamental 
principle,  and  maintain  that  only  such  writings  can  be  ac- 
counted Scripture  as  approve  themselves  to  be  God's  word 
by  renewing  or  building  up  the  fundamental  faith  in  God 
which  has  already  been  quickened  within  us?  This  funda- 
mental principle  of  protestantism — that  God's  word  is  self- 
evidencing — can  we  carry  it  over  to  the  subject  of  canonicity 
and  make  it  the  sole,  absolute  test  of  canonicity?  Or  can 
we  at  any  rate  say  that  whatever  agrees  with  the  word  of 
God,  which  at  first  begot  faith  in  us,  and  presents  to  us  the 
same  Gospel  and  the  same  Christ  is  canonical  ?  This  Luther 
does,  subject  to  the  limitation  that  it  springs  from  the  Apos- 
tolic Circle.  Or  can  we  only  use  this  fundamental  faith  of 
our  own  as  a  negative  test,  rejecting  whatever  does  not 
harmonize  with  that  faith  in  Christ  which  has  given  us 
spiritual  life,  or  at  any  rate  whatever  contradicts  it?  In 
other  words,  can  I  sa^^  that  all  those  writings  are  canonical 
which  awaken  faith  in  me  ?  or  can  I  say  that  all  those  writings 
are  canonical  which  present  that  same  Christ,  whose  presen- 
tation at  first  awakened  faith  in  me ;  or  can  I  only  say  that 
those  are  certainly  not  canonical  which  do  not  harmonize 
with  faith  in  Christ  ? 

''Now  we  shall  find  Luther's  answer  to  these  questions 
in  the  judgments  he  pronounced  on  the  books  actually  form- 
ing our  Canon.  Taking  up  his  translation  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment, we  find  that  the  four  writings — Hebrews,  James,  Jude, 
and  Revelation — which  he  considered  to  be  non-apostolic, 
are  relegated  to  the  end  by  themselves,  and  introduced  with 
these  significant  words:  'Up  to  this  point  we  have  been 
dealing  with  the  quite  certain  (rechten  gewissen)  chief  books 
(Hauptbuecher)  of  the  New  Testament.  But  these  four  fol- 
lowing have  in  times  past  had  a  different  position.'  He 
then  goes  on  to  prove  briefly  but  convincingly  that  Hebrews 
is  not  by  Paul  nor  by  any  Apostle,  and  after  extolling  its 
ability,  and  pointing  out  what  he  considered  faulty,  he  re- 
marks that  'although  the  writer  does  not  lay  the  foundation 
of  faith,  which  is  the  apostolic  function,  he  yet  builds  upon 
it  gold,  silver,  precious  stones,  and  if,  in  accordance  with 


24  THE    PROTESTANT   CRITERION 

Paul's  words,  he  mingles  some  wood,  hay,  stubble,  this  is  not 
to  hinder  us  from  accepting  with  all  reverence  his  teaching — 
although  it  cannot  in  all  respects  be  compared  to  the  Apos- 
tolic Epistles.'  His  criticisms  on  the  Apocalypse  are  also 
very  outspoken:  'My  spirit,'  he  says,  'can't  accommodate 
itself  to  this  book :  the  reason  being  that  I  do  not  think  Christ 
is  taught  therein.'"^  His  judgment  of  this  book,  however, 
underwent  considerable  modification ;  and  although,  in  con- 
tradistinction to  the  body  of  modern  critics,  he  seems  never 
to  have  been  convinced  that  it  was  written  by  the  Apostle 
John,  it  is  not  probable  that  in  his  later  years  he  would  have 
spoken  of  it  so  slightingly.  But  in  his  introductory  remarks 
to  the  Epistle  of  James  he  shows  more  explicitly  his  criterion 
or  test  of  canonicity.  He  refuses  to  admit  this  epistle  among 
the  Hauptbuecher  of  the  New  Testament,  or  to  allow  its  apos- 
tolic authorship,  and  he  defends  his  judgment  in  these  words : 
'Herein  agree  all  the  genuine  {rechtschaffene)  holy  books,  that 
they  all  preach  and  exhibit  Christ.  This,  indeed,  is  the 
right  touchstone  {der  rechte  Pruef stein)  to  test  all  the  books, 
— if  one  sees  whether  or  not  they  present  Christ,  for  all  Scrip- 
ture witnesses  to  Christ  (Rom.  iii.  21);  and  St.  Paul  will 
know  nothing  but  Christ.  That  which  does  not  teach  Christ 
is  not  apostolic,  though  St.  Peter  or  St.  Paul  teaches  it. 
That  which  preaches  Christ  is  apostolic,  though  Judas, 
Annas,  Pilate,  or  Herod  teaches  it.' 

"Luther's  direct  test  of  canonicity,  then,  is,  Does  the 
book  in  question  occupy  itself  with  Christ  or  does  it  not? 
So  says  Dornerif  'The  deciding  principle  as  to  whether  a 
writing  is  to  pass  for  canonical  lies,  in  a  dogmatic  aspect, 
according  to  Luther,  as  well  known,  in  this,  whether  it  is 
occupied  with  Christ.'  Luther,  in  short,  recognizes  that 
God  has  an  end  to  secure  in  making  a  revelation,  and  this 
end  is  to  bring  clear  before  men  His  will  for  our  salvation ; 
or,  in  one  word,  Christ.  The  books  that  promote  this  end 
he  accepts  as  canonical. 

*Luther's  "Prefaces"  are  to  be  found  in  old  editions  of  his  translations 
of  the  Bible.     See  also  Reuss's  "History  of  the  Canon,"  p.  347. 


fHistory  of  Protestant  Theology,  E.  Tr.  I.,  p.  252. 


THE   PROTESTANT   CRITERION  25 

''But  while  this  was  Luther's  final  and  determining  test 
of  canonicity,  it  is  obvious  that  he  at  the  same  time  employed 
some  preliminary  test.  He  applied  his  final  test,  not  to  all 
books  he  knew,  but  only  to  a  number  already  selected  and 
already  passing  for  canonical.  He  never  thought  of  carrying 
his  principle  through  all  literature  and  accepting  as  canonical 
every  book  that  was  occupied  with  Christ.  He  did  not 
accept  Augustine  and  Tauler  as  canonical,  though  to  them 
he  in  great  part  owed  his  salvation,  his  peace,  his  light,  his 
strength.  And  it  may,  on  the  other  hand,  be  questioned 
whether,  with  all  his  boldness,  he  would  have  dared  to  reject 
any  writing  which  was  proved  to  be  of  apostolic  authorship 
In  point  of  fact  he  does  not  reject  any  such  writing.  His 
test  of  canonicity  is,  in  short,  only  a  supplemental  principle 
which  can  be  applied  only  in  a  field  already  defined  by  the 
application  of  some  other  principle,  or  by  some  universal 
usage  such  as  the  Church-collection  of  Scriptures  had  sprung 
from.  Luther's  method  is  really  this :  he  first  accepts  at  the 
hand  of  Jerome  certain  candidates  for  admission  into  the 
Canon,  and  to  these  selected  candidates  he  applies  this  test. 
He  was  aware  that  up  to  Jerome's  time  the  Church  had 
always  been  in  doubt  regarding  certain  of  these  writings, 
and  to  these  he  freely  applies  the  testing  question,  Are  they 
occupied  with  Christ  ? 

''Theoretically,  therefore,  Reuss  is  right  in  saying  that 
Luther  did  not  look  upon  the  Canon  as  a  collection,  more  or 
less  complete,  of  all  the  writings  of  a  certain  period  or  of  a 
certain  class  of  men,  but  as  a  body  of  writings  destined  by 
God  to  teach  a  certain  truth;  and  accordingly  the  test  of  the 
individual  writings  must  at  bottom  lie  in  the  teaching  itself.* 
But  praUically  what  Luther  did  was  to  apply  this  test  only 
to  writings  which  already  had  some  claim  to  be  considered 
apostolical.  The  course  of  his  thought  was  briefiy  this: 
he  arrived  at  faith  in  Christ  before  he  reached  any  clear  view 
of  the  inspiration  or  canonicity  of  certain  writers ;  he  reached 
faith  in  Christ  apart  from  any  doctrine  regarding  Scripture. 
But  having  believed  in  Christ,  he  found  that  certain  men 

♦''History  of  Protestant  Theology,"  E.  Tr.,  I.,  page  344. 


26  THE   PROTESTANT  CRITERION 

had  been  appointed  by  Christ  to  witness  to  the  great  facts 
of  His  hfe,  death,  resurrection,  and  gift  of  the  Spirit.  The 
same  faith  which  accepts  Christ  as  supreme,  the  same  faith 
which  produces  self -verifying  results  in  his  soul  compels  him 
also  to  believe  that  the  commission  of  Christ  to  His  Apostles 
was  actually  effectual,  and  that  they  are  the  appointed, 
normative  witnesses  to  Him  and  His  salvation.  The  writ- 
ings of  these  Apostles  he  accepts,  though  holding  himself 
free  to  reject  them  if  they  contradict  the  fundamental  faith 
in  Christ  which  gave  him  his  new  life.  The  other  books, 
whose  authorship  is  doubtful,  but  which  from  the  first  have 
claimed  admittance  to  the  New  Testament  Canon,  he  judges 
purely  on  their  merits,  rejecting  or  admitting  as  he  finds 
they  do  not  or  do  fit  into  the  apostolic  teaching. 

"This,  it  will  be  said,  leaves  a  ragged  edge  on  the  Canon. 
It  leaves  much  to  be  decided  by  the  individual.  A  man 
may  say  to  Luther,  *I  do  not  find  in  the  gospel  of  John  agree- 
ment with  the  three  synoptic  gospels,  and  as  you  throw  over 
James  because  he  does  not  agree  with  Paul,  so  I  throw  over 
John  because  he  does  not  agree  with  the  synoptists.'  And 
Luther  could  have  made  no  satisfactory  reply.  Better,  he 
would  think,  let  a  man  accept  Scripture  from  his  own  feeling 
of  its  truth  than  compel  him  to  do  so  by  some  external  com- 
pulsion. Indeed,  his  boldness  in  pronouncing  his  own  opinion 
is  quite  equalled  by  his  explicit  and  repeated  allowance  of 
liberty  to  every  other  man.  Thus,  though  he  himself  did  not 
accept  the  Apocalypse  as  the  work  of  John,  he  hastens  to 
add,  'No  man  ought  to  be  hindered  from  holding  it  to  be  a 
work  of  St.  John  or  otherwise  as  he  will.'  Similarly,  after 
giving  his  opinion  of  the  Epistle  of  James,  he  concludes,  'I 
cannot  then  place  it  among  the  chief  books,  but  I  will  forbid 
no  one  to  place  and  elevate  it  as  he  pleases.'  So  that  if  we 
find  ourselves  in  disagreement  with  Luther  regarding  the 
judgments  he  pronounces  on  some  of  the  books  of  Scripture, 
this  is  only  what  he  himself  anticipated.  Neither  does  the 
fact  that  his  principle  can  never  be  applied  without  such  dis- 
cordant results  emerging,  reflect  any  discredit  on  the  prin- 
ciple itself.  As  Reuss  says.  To  begin  to  speak  to-day  of  the 
infatuation  of  Luther's  method  of  procedure,  because  in  the 


THE   PROTESTANT   CRITERION  27 

details  of  its  application  one  cannot  always  share  in  his 
opinion,  this  only  proves  that  with  the  modem  champions  of 
a  pretended,  privileged  orthodoxy,  ignorance  and  fatuity 
go  hand  and  hand  in  the  van.' 

*The  same  vagueness  which  marred  the  Lutheran  doc- 
trine of  canonicity  affected  the  Calvinistic  position.  The 
inward  witness  cannot  reasonably  be  expected  to  be  sufficient 
for  the  task  of  certifying  every  word  that  God  has  uttered 
to  man.  It  cannot,  in  other  words,  be  expected  to  form  of 
itself  a  sufficient  test  of  canonicity. 

*'The  truth  is  there  seems  to  have  been  some  confusion 
of  thought  in  Calvinistic  writers,  arising  from  the  fact  that 
in  speaking  of  the  authority  of  Scripture  they  viewed  Scripture 
as  a  whole.  Challenged  by  the  Romanists  to  say  how 
they  knew  the  Bible  to  be  from  God,  they  said,  We  know  it 
to  be  from  God  because  God's  Spirit  within  us  recognizes  it 
as  His.  But  this  inward  witness  could  only  become  a  test 
of  canonicity  if  the  Bible  were  an  indissoluble  whole,  part 
hanging  with  part,  so  that  each  part  stands  or  falls  with 
every  other  part. 

''If,  in  order  to  prove  the  canonicity  of  all  the  writings  in 
the  Bible,  it  were  enough  to  say,  the  Spirit  within  me  recog- 
nizes God's  voice  in  the  Bible  as  a  whole,  then  this  were  a 
sufficient  test.  If,  in  order  to  prove  the  canonicity  of  the 
Epistle  of  James,  it  were  enough  to  say,  I  recognize  the  voice 
of  God  in  the  Epistle  of  John,  then  the  'inward  witness  of  the 
Spirit'  would  be  a  sufficient  test.  But  the  very  thing  we  are 
seeking  for  is  that  which  brought  the  parts  together,  the  principle 
on  which  the  Church  proceeded  when  it  took  one  writing  here 
and  another  there  and  brought  them  into  one  whole.  What 
is  it  which  is  characteristic  of  each  part,  so  that  even  when 
the  parts  were  lying  separate,  they  could  be  and  were  recog- 
nized as  properly  belonging  to  the  Canonical  Scriptures? 
The  question  seeking  solution  is,  why  do  we  receive  this  or 
that  book  into  the  Canon?  There  is  no  question  here  as  to 
whether  we  have  a  word  of  God,  nor  as  to  the  general  collec- 
tion of  writings  in  which  we  find  that  word ;  the  question  is, 
how  do  we  know  that  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  or  the 
Epistle  of  Jude,  or  any  other  individual  writing,  is  the  word 
of  God? 


28  THE   PROTESTANT   CRITERION 

"The  Westminster  Confession  makes  'inspiration'  the  test 
of  canonicity,  although  it  does  not  in  express  terms  say  so. 
After  naming  the  books  of  the  Old  and  New  Testament,  it 
proceeds,  'all  which  are  given  by  inspiration  of  God;'  and 
then  in  section  three  it  goes  on,  'The  books  commonly  called 
Apocrypha,  not  being  of  Divine  inspiration,  are  no  part  of  the 
Canon  of  Scripture.'  That  is  to  say,  writings  which  are 
inspired  are  canonical,  writings  not  inspired  are  not  canoni- 
cal. But  how  are  we  to  discover  what  writings  are  inspired? 
The  Confession,  singularly  enough,  says  nothing  of  prophetic 
and  apostolic  authorship,  but  refers  us  to  the  various 
marks  of  divinity  in  the  writings  themselves,  and  concludes 
in  the  well-known  words,  'Our  full  persuasion  and  assurance 
of  the  infallible  truth  and  Divine  authority  thereof,  is  from 
the  inward  work  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  bearing  witness  by  and 
with  the  word  in  our  hearts.' 

"There  are  two  processes  by  which  we  can  arrive  at  the 
conclusion  that  a  writing  is  inspired.  First,  as  in  reading 
any  book  we  form  an  opinion  of  it,  and  either  pronounce  it 
stupid  or  feel  in  it  the  touch  of  genius,  so  in  reading  the  work 
of  an  inspired  man  we  may  arrive  at  the  conclusion  that  it 
has  been  written  with  Divine  aid.  There  may  be  that  in  it 
which  makes  us  feel  that  we  have  to  do  with  a  Divine  as 
w^ell  as  a  human  author.  Second,  we  may  believe  in  the  in- 
spiration of  a  book,  because  w^e  first  of  all  believe  in  Christ, 
and  find  that  He  authorized  certain  persons  to  speak  in  His 
name  and  with  His  authority  and  spirit.  When  the  well- 
authenticated  w^ritings  of  such  persons  come  into  our  hands, 
we  accept  them,  if  we  are  already  Christian. 

"But  there  are  books  in  the  Bible  whose  inspiration  can- 
not be  ascertained  by  either  of  these  methods.  There  are 
books  of  which  we  cannot  say  that  they  are  written  by 
prophet  or  apostle  or  otherwise  commissioned  person ;  Chron- 
icles, Esther,  Job,  Ecclesiastes, — no  one  knows  who  wrote 
these  books.  One  of  the  methods  of  ascertaining  inspira- 
tion is  therefore  closed  to  us.  And  as  to  the  other  method, 
the  inward  witness,  I  am  not  persuaded  that  John  Ow^en 
himself  could  have  detected  the  book  of  Esther  as  an  inspired 
book,  had  it  been  found  lying  outside  the  Canon.    How,  then, 


THE    PROTESTANT   CRITERION  29 

can  we  justify  the  admission  of  such  a  book  as  Esther — a 
book  of  which  the  authorship  is  unknown,  and  to  which  the 
inward  witness  bears  at  the  best  a  somewhat  doubtful  testi- 
mony so  far  as  regards  its  inspiration  ? 

*'To  say  that  we  accept  it  because  the  Jews  accepted  it, 
is  simply  to  fall  back  to  the  Romanist  position  and  take  our 
Canon  at  the  hands  and  by  the  authority  of  the  Church. 
To  affirm  that  the  men  who  settled  the  Canon  were  inspired, 
is  to  assume  what  cannot  be  proved,  and  even  to  affirm  what 
we  know  to  be  false,  because  discussion  was  still  going  on 
among  the  Jews  regarding  their  Canon  as  late  as  the  year 
96  A.  D.  We  can  only  justify  the  admission  of  these  books 
on  some  such  general  ground  as  that  of  Luther — their  con- 
gruity  to  the  main  end  of  revelation.  If  by  'canonical 
writings'  we  mean  the  writings  through  which  God  conveys 
to  us  the  knowledge  of  the  revelation  He  has  made,  if  this 
be  the  prominent  idea,  and  if  their  being  the  rule  of  faith 
and  life  be  an  inference  from  this,  then  we  get  a  broader 
basis  for  the  Canon  and  can  admit  into  it  all  writings  which 
have  a  direct  connection  with  God's  revelation  of  Himself 
in  Christ.  If  the  book  in  question  gives  us  a  link  in  the  his- 
tory of  that  revelation,  or  if  it  represents  a  stage  of  God's 
dealings  and  of  the  growth  His  people  had  made  under  these 
dealings,  and  if  it  contains  nothing  which  is  quite  inconsist- 
ent with  the  idea  of  its  being  inspired,  then  its  claim  to  be 
admitted  seems  valid.  Therefore  I  would  be  disposed  to 
say  that  the  two  attributes  which  give  canonicity  are  con- 
gruity  with  the  main  end  of  revelation  and  direct  historical 
connection  with  the  revelation  of  God  in  history.* 

'Tt  may  indeed  be  said  that  if  such  a  book  as  Esther  were 
lost,  nothing  that  is  essential  to  the  history  would  be  lost,  or 
that  if  several  of  the  Psalms  were  lost  nothing  essential  would 
be  lost.  But  this  is  really  to  say  no  more  than  that  a  man  who 
has  lost  a  joint  of  a  finger  or  a  toe  has  lost  nothing  essential. 
No  doubt  he  can  live  on  and  do  his  work,  but  he  is  not  a 
complete  man.  And  there  are  parts  of  the  body  of  which  it 
is  very  difficult  to  say  why  they  are  there,  or  why  they  are 

*A  similar,  if  not  indentical,  conclusion  was  reached  by  the  late  A. 
B.  Bruce,  but  I  have  lost  the  reference. 


30  THE    PROTESTANT   CRITERION 

of  the  particular  form  they  are ;  but  there  they  are,  and  the 
want  of  them  would  seem  a  deformity.  So  of  the  Bible,  we 
may  not  be  able  to  say  of  every  part  that  it  its  exact  relation 
to  the  whole ;  nor  yet  may  we  be  able  in  honesty  to  say  that 
we  think  anything  essential  would  be  lost  were  certain  por- 
tions of  Scripture  to  be  removed ;  and  yet  he  would  be  a  rash 
man  who  would  dare  to  aver  that  he  could  improve  upon  the 
Canon,  or  who  should  think  it  needful  to  excise  from  it  such 
parts  as  to  himself  may  seem  unimportant. 

*Trom  all  this,  then,  we  must  gather  (i)  that  churches 
should  be  cautious  in  speaking  of  the  Canon  as  an  absolutely 
defined  collection  of  writings,  thoroughly  and  to  a  nicety 
ascertained,  based  on  distinct  principles  and  precisely  sepa- 
rated at  every  point  from  all  extracanonical  literature. 
There  is  no  reasonable  doubt  that  the  bulk  of  the  books  of 
the  New  Testament  come  to  us  so  accredited  that  to  reject 
them  is  equivalent  to  rejecting  the  authority  of  Christ ;  but 
a  few  are  not  so  accredited,  and  it  is  a  question  whether  our 
creeds  ought  not  to  reflect  the  fact  that  in  the  early  Church 
some  books  were  universally  admitted  into  the  Canon,  while 
regarding  seven  of  the  books  of  our  New  Testament  grave 
doubts  were  entertained.  The  position  taken  by  one  of  the 
greatest  champions  of  protestantism,  Chillingworth,  is  one 
that  commends  itself:  'I  may  believe  even  those  questioned 
books  to  have  been  written  by  the  Apostles  and  to  be  canon- 
ical ;  but  I  cannot  in  reason  believe  this  of  them  so  undoubt- 
edly as  of  those  books  which  were  never  questioned :  at  least 
I  have  no  warrant  to  damn  any  man  that  shall  doubt  of  them 
or  deny  them  now,  having  the  example  of  saints  in  heaven, 
either  to  justify  or  excuse  such  their  doubting  or  denial.' 
This  was  the  position  of  Luther  and  of  the  Reformers  gener- 
ally, and  for  my  part  I  think  it  a  pity  it  was  ever  abandoned. 
It  is  not  a  calamity  over  which  one  need  make  great  moan, 
but  unquestionably  the  combining  of  less  authenticated 
books  with  those  that  are  thoroughly  authenticated  has 
rather  tended  to  bring  the  latter  class  under  suspicion  with 
persons  ignorant  of  their  history. 

"We  also  gather  (2)  what  ought  to  be  the  attitude  of  the 
ordinary  lay  protestant  toward   this  subject  of  the  Canon. 


THE    PROTESTANT   CRITERION  31 

Sometimes  Romanists  have  taunted  us  with  the  absurdity 
of  inviting  each  protestant,  educated  or  uneducated,  to  settle 
the  Canon  for  himself.  The  taunt  is  based  on  a  misconcep- 
tion. It  is  the  right  of  every  protestant  to  inquire  into  the 
evidence  on  which  certain  books  are  received  as  canonical, 
and  the  more  that  right  is  exercised,  the  better.  But  even 
when  the  right  is  not  used,  it  is  not  thereby  resigned.  Protest- 
ants receive  the  Canon  as  they  receive  historical  facts,  on 
the  testimony  of  those  who  have  pursued  this  line  of  inquiry. 
We  may  never  have  individually  looked  into  the  evidence  for 
Alexander's  invasion  of  India,  but  we  take  it  on  the  word  of 
those  best  informed  regarding  historical  matters,  reserving 
of  course  the  right  to  examine  it  ourselves  if  need  arises. 
So  on  this  subject  of  the  Canon,  the  lay  protestant  accepts 
the  judgment  of  the  Reformed  Churches,  feeling  tolerably 
confident  that  after  all  the  research  and  discussion  which 
learned  men  have  spent  upon  this  subject,  the  result  cannot 
be  seriously  misleading.  But  he  of  course  reserves  the  right 
to  inquire  for  himself  if  opportunity  should  arise,  and  does 
not  dream  that  the  decision  of  the  Church  binds  him  to 
accept  certain  books  as  Divine.  The  protestant  accepts 
the  decision  of  the  Church  precisely  as  he  accepts  the  decision 
of  engineers  or  medical  men  or  experts  of  any  kind  in  their 
respective  departments — he  accepts  it  as  the  result  arrived 
at  after  deliberation  by  competent  men.  The  Romanist 
accepts  the  decision  of  the  Church  as  a  decree  of  law  issued 
because  the  Church  wills  it  so,  and  not  as  the  mere  finding 
of  learned  men ;  and  the  Romanist  has  no  right  to  revise  the 
Church's  decision.  The  Romanist  holds  that  the  Church 
has  power  to  make  books  canonical ;  the  protestant  holds 
that  irrespective  of  any  ecclesiastical  decision  there  is  that 
in  the  books  themselves  which  makes  them  canonical.  To 
confound  the  two  positions  is  ignorant  or  malicious. 

''(3)  Again,  protestants  are  taunted  with  the  diversity 
of  opinion  consequent  on  leaving  such  questions  to  individual 
research  and  private  judgment.  I  reply  that  it  is  a  vast 
advantage  so  to  leave  such  questions,  for  it  is  to  invite  in- 
vestigation, and  to  invite  investigation  is  to  secure  that  one 
day  the  truth  will  shine  in  the  eye  of  the  world.     What 


32  THE    PROTESTANT   CRITERION 

value  attaches  to  the  unanimity  that  is  secured  by  closing 
every  one's  eyes,  and  shutting  every  one's  mouth?  That 
unanimity  alone  is  valuable  which  the  truth  itself  commands. 
And  this  unanimity  can  only  be  attained  by  diligent,  rever- 
ent, truth-seeking  investigation.  For  my  part,  I  think 
Luther  was  right  in  holding  that  regarding  some  of  the  books 
there  must  be  difference  of  opinion  always ;  but  of  the  great 
bulk  of  the  New  Testament, — the  four  Gospels,  the  Acts, 
the  Epistles  of  Paul,  the  First  of  Peter,  and  the  First  of  John, 
— as  there  was  no  difference  of  opinion  in  the  early  Church, 
so  eventually  there  will  be  an  entire  agreement.  Men  do  not 
differ  regarding  the  authorship  of  'Hamlet,'  nor  the  esteem 
in  which  that  writing  should  be  held,  neither  will  private 
judgment  and  liberty  of  criticism  cause  men  to  differ  regard- 
ing the  canonical  books,  but  will  rather  bring  them  to  the 
only  agreement  that  is  worth  having. 

''Lastly,  let  us  remember  that  the  true  protestant  order 
is,  first,  faith  in  Christ;  second,  faith  in  Scripture.  Our 
faith  in  Christ  does  not  hang  upon  our  faith  in  Scripture,  but 
our  faith  in  Scripture  hangs  upon  our  faith  in  Christ.  Our 
faith  in  Christ  may  depend  on  Scripture  as  a  true  history; 
but  not  as  an  inspired  canonical  book.  It  is  Christ  as  pre- 
sented in  Scripture  or  by  other  means,  by  preaching  as  in 
the  first  age,  and  often  now,  that  evokes  faith.  He  and  he 
only  is  the  true  protestant  who  knows  that  God  has  spoken 
to  him  in  Christ,  and  who  knows  this  irrespective  of  any 
infallible  authority  separable  from  Christ  himself,  whether 
that  authority  be  the  authority  of  the  Church  or  the  author- 
ity of  Scripture.  We  must  not  shift  the  ultimate  authority 
form  Christ  to  Scripture." 

We  have  presented  this  long  quotation  as  it  sums  up  the 
position  of  what  might  be  considered  the  most  conservative 
protestantism.  The  very  principle  on  which  protestantism 
was  founded  must  lead  to  rationalism  and  it  has  led  to  it. 
Outside  the  Catholic  Church  dogma  is  decried  as  narrow  and 
bigoted,  and  the  Scriptures  are  only  stray  records  of  man's 
striving  after  God.  According  to  them  the  Scriptures  are 
the  product  of  the  thought  of  successive  ages,  and  reflect  the 
evolution  of  Man's  conceptions  of  the  Deity,  and  of  his  state 


THE    PROTESTANT    CRITERION  .      33 

of  culture.  Much  therefore  in  them  is  to  be  attributed  to 
the  erroneous  ideas  of  that  cruder  age,  and  therefore  now 
must  be  discarded,  as  not  in  harmony  with  our  finer  ideas. 
When  Dods  wrote  his  statement  he  had  not  read  Tolstoi's 
criticism  of  Hamlet. 

The  force  with  which  these  liberal  ideas  are  propounded 
and  the  popularity  which  they  acquire  have  led  astray  some 
of  the  members  of  the  Catholic  Church.  The  progress  of  the 
movement  evoked  from  the  venerable  Head  of  the  Church  a 
powerful  denunciation  in  his  address  to  the  newly  created 
cardinals  on  April  i8,  of  the  present  year.  We  quote  the 
following  short  passage: 

"For  these  modem  heretics,  the  Holy  Scripture  is  not  a 
sure  source  of  all  the  truths  concerning  faith,  but  an  ordin- 
ary book.  For  them  inspiration  reduces  itself  to  dogmatic 
doctrines  understood  in  their  own  fashion,  and  differs  but 
little  from  the  poetic  inspiration  of  ^schylus  and  of  Homer. 
According  to  them  the  legitimate  interpreter  of  the  Bible  is 
the  Church,  but  the  Church  subject  to  the  rules  of  so  called 
critical  science  which  dominates  and  enslaves  theology.  As 
for  tradition,  everything  is  relative  and  subject  to  muta- 
tions, consequently  the  authority  of  the  holy  Fathers  is 
reduced  to  a  nullity.  All  these  nimierous  errors  are  propa- 
gated by  means  of  pamphlets,  reviews,  books  on  asceticism, 
and  even  novels.  These  errors  are  wrapt  up  in  certain 
ambiguous  terms  and  in  vague  forms  in  order  that  there  may 
be  always  an  opening  for  defense,  so  as  not  to  incur  a  formal 
condemnation  while  at  the  same  time  the  unwary  may  be 
taken  in  the  toils. ' ' 

The  protestant  subjectivism  crude  and  indefinite  in  Luther, 
was  more  definitely  formulated  by  Zwinglius,  Calvin,  and 
their  followers.  Thus  Zwinglius  declares:  'T  know  that  I 
am  taught  of  God  because  I  feel  him.  Let  no  one  raise  the 
objection :  How  knowest  thou  that  thou  art  taught  of  God  ? 
When  I  was  a  youth  I  had  not  progressed  more  in  human 
knowledge  than  my  equals.  But  when  seven  or  eight  years 
ago  I  began  to  devote  myself  entirely  to  the  Scriptures,  the 
philosophy  and  theology  of  cavilers  continually  aimed  at  me 
objections.     Wherefore  relying  on  the  Scriptures  and  the 


34  THE    PROTESTANT   CRITERION 

^ord  of  God  I  came  to  this  conclusion :  Thou  must  leave  all, 
and  learn  the  pure  teaching  of  God  from  his  own  plain  word. 
Then  I  began  to  ask  God  for  light,  and  the  Scriptures,  though 
I  read  only  them,  they  began  to  be  much  clearer  than  if 
I  read  many  commentaries  and  commentators."  (Huldreich 
Zwinglis  Werke,  I.  79). 

Relying  on  this  same  spirit  Zwinglius  declares  of  Luther : 
''Clearly  and  dispassionately  I  shall  show  that  in  the  doc- 
trine of  this  sacrament  (the  Eucharist)  the  almighty  God  has 
not  revealed  the  secrets  of  his  counsels  to  Martin  Luther." 
(Ibid.) 

For  his  criterion  Calvin  appeals  to  the  secret  testimony 
of  the  Spirit,  area  wwn  testimonium  Spiritus :  "It  remains  there- 
fore firmly  established  that  the  Scripture  is  avroirta-Tov: 
neither  is  it  right  to  subject  the  Scriptures  to  the  logical 
demonstration ;  and  the  Spirit  establishes  a  certitude  by  his 
testimony.  .  .  .  Illumined  therefore  by  his  power  we 
conclude  with  certainty,  no  less  than  if  we  saw  in  them  the 
divinity  of  God  himself,  that  by  the  ministry  of  men  they 
have  come  down  to  us  from  the  mouth  of  God."  (Instit. 
Christ.  Rel.  6). 

Calvin  admitted  as  subsidiary  helps  the  harmony,  dignity, 
truth,  simplicity,  power,  and  sublimity  of  the  Scriptures. 

In  the  year  1675  Henry  Heidegger  drew  up  a  Helvetian 
Formula  in  which  this  declaration  occurs:  'The  Hebrew 
text  of  the  Old  Testament  which  we  have  received  from  the 
Jewish  church,  to  which  of  old  the  oracles  of  God  were  com- 
mitted, we  receive  and  hold  fast,  both  the  consonants  and 
the  vowel  points,  or  at  least  their  value,  and  w^e  hold  both 
the  truths  and  the  words  to  be  inspired. ' '  (Niemeyer  Collect. 
Conf.) 

This  extreme  formula  was  abrogated  in  1725.  All  the 
Calvinist  formulas,  the  Galilean,  Scotch,  Belgian,  Anglican, 
and  Bohemian,  set  up  the  testimony  of  the  Spirit  as  the 
criterion  of  inspiration. 

The  Westminister  Conf .  I.  5  reads  thus:  "We  may  be 
moved  and  influenced  by  the  testimony  of  the  Church  to  a 
high  and  reverent  esteem  of  the  holy  scripture,  and  the 
heavenliness  of  the  matter,  the  efficacy  of  the  doctrine,  the 


THE    PROTESTANT    CRITERION  35 

majesty  of  the  style,  the  consent  of  all  the  parts,  the  scope 
of  the  whole  (which  is  to  give  all  glory  to  God),  the  full  dis- 
covery it  makes  of  the  only  way  of  man's  salvation,  the 
many  other  incomparable  excellencies,  and  the  entire  per- 
fection thereof  are  arguments  whereby  it  doth  abundantly 
evidence  itself  to  be  the  word  of  God ;  yet  notwithstanding, 
our  full  persuasion  and  assurance  of  the  infallible  truth  and 
divine  authority  thereof  is  from  the  inward  work  of  the 
Holy  Ghost  bearing  witness  by  and  with  the  word  in  our 
hearts." 

We  see  a  general  tendency  in  protestantism  to  appeal 
to  the  tradition  of  the  Jews  as  a  criterion  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment. Thus  John  Gerhard  (De  Locis  Theol.)  declares: 
"That  a  book  of  the  Old  Testament  should  be  canonical,  it 
is  necessary  that  it  should  be  written  in  the  prophetic,  that 
is,  the  Hebrew  tongue." 

Hence  those  protest  ants  who  saw  the  futility  of  the  sub- 
jective criterion  were  more  anxious  to  find  a  criterion  for  the 
New  Testament.  John  David  Michaelis  of  Gottingen 
(t  1 791)  rejected  all  subjective  criterions,  and  established 
for  the  New  Testament  one  criterion,  to  wit,  that  a  book  of 
the  New  Testament  is  canonical  if  wTitten  by  one  who  has 
received  the  Apostolic  commission.  He  therefore  rejected 
the  Gospels  of  Mark  and  Luke  and  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles. 

(Einleitung  in  die  Gottlichen  Schriften  des  Neuen 
Bundes.) 

Concerning  the  affirmative  sense  of  this  statement 
Catholic  theologians  differ.  Perrone  and  Franzelin,  and 
more  recently  Crets  (De  Div.  Insp.)  Schmid,  Chauvin, 
Zanecchia,  Scheeben,  Heinrich,  Hurter,  and  Pesch  (De  Insp. 
Sac.  Script.  Friburgi  1906)  deny  it;  Ubaldi  (Introd.  in  S. 
Script.  1878)  and  Schanz  (Apologie)  defend  it.  However  it 
seems  certain  that  if  an  apostle  wrote  as  a  teacher  of  the 
faithful,  on  a  theme  connected  with  religion, his  writings  ipso 
facto  would  be  inspired.  In  other  words  whenever  an 
apostle  exercised  his  apostolic  office  of  teaching  he  was 
inspired,  whether  he  spoke  or  wrote. 

But  Michaelis'  criterion  is  inadequate,  because  the  apos- 
tolic commission  is  not  an  exclusive  condition  of  an  inspired 


36  THE   PROTESTANT   CRITERION 

writer.  No  one  now  would  accept  a  criterion  that  excludes 
Mark,  Luke  and  Acts.  Again  a  criterion  must  tell  me  not 
only  that,  if  a  book  be  written  under  certain  conditions,  it  is  in- 
spired, but  it  must  tell  me  that  certain  definite  books  uncon- 
ditionally are  inspired.  What  avails  it,  if  a  man  tell  me  that, 
if  the  Second  Epistle  of  Peter  be  written  by  him,  it  is  in- 
spired? What  I  must  know  is  that  it  is  the  word  of  God. 
It  is  evident  that  the  subsidiary  criteria  appealed  to  by 
Calvin  are  not  sufficient  to  form  a  criterion.  The  Imitation 
of  Christ,  and  certain  sermons  of  the  Fathers  are  more  sub- 
lime than  Chronicles  and  Ezra.  The  "inner  voice"  is  re- 
pudiated by  candid  protestants. 

John  David  Michcelis,  the  learned  professor  of  Gottingen, 
speaks  thus  of  this  means:  "This  interior  sensation  of  the 
effects  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  the  conviction  of  the  utility 
of  these  writings  to  better  the  heart  and  purify  us  are  en- 
tirely uncertain  cr iter  ions.  As  regards  this  interior  sensa- 
tion, I  avow  that  I  have  never  experienced  it,  and  those  who 
have  felt  it  are  not  to  be  envied.  It  cannot  evince  the  divine 
character  of  the  book,  since  the  Muhammadans  feel  it  as 
well  as  Christians,  and  pious  sentiments  can  be  aroused  by 
documents  purely  human,  by  the  writings  of  philosophers, 
and  even  by  doctrine  founded  in  error. ' '  (Einleitung  in  die 
Gottlichen  Schriften  des  Neuen  Bundes.)  Burnett  also,  in 
his  Exposition  of  the  XXXIX  Articles,  speaks  thus  of  this 
subjective  criterion :  "This  is  only  an  argument  to  him  that 
feels  it,  if  it  is  one  at  all;  and,  therefore,  it  proves  nothing 
to  another  person."  No  subjective  criterion  could  ever  be 
apt  for  such  use,  since  it  would  depend  on  the  subjective 
dispositions  of  individuals,  and  one  and  the  same  individual 
would,  at  different  times,  be  differently  affected  by  the  same 
book.  Moreover,  this  pious  movement  can  come  from  other 
than  inspired  books.  A  man  will  feel  more  religious  emotion 
from  the  reading  of  the  Imitation  of  Christ  than  from  the 
Book  of  Judges.  But  experience  itself  disproves  this  system. 
Honest  men  attest  that  they  do  not  feel  this  pious  movement, 
and  the  opinion  may  now  be  said  to  be  obsolete. 

The  Calvinists'  particular  inspiration  of  the  Holy  Ghost 
in  the  individual's  soul  is  cognate  to  the  Calvinistic  theor}^  of 


THE    PROTESTANT   CRITERION  37 

the  invisible  church,  and  they  both  fall  together.  Once 
establish  a  visible  authoritative  Magisterium,  and  such 
means  of  interpreting  Holy  Scripture  becomes  incompatible 
with  it.  It  is  evident  that  such  a  system  of  private  inspir- 
ation can  never  be  proven.  There  never  can  be  any  avail- 
able data  to  establish  such  secret  action.  It  must  ever 
remain  a  gratuitous,  groundless  assumption.  It  is  exactly 
opposite  to  the  economy  of  God.  When  He  would  teach  the 
world,  He  did  it  by  means  of  divinely  commissioned  men, 
directly  establishing  that  such  mode  of  teaching  truth  would 
last  always.  This  were  absurd,  were  the  evangelization  of 
mankind  to  be  effected  by  the  sole  direct  inspiration  of  the 
Holy  Ghost  in  the  heart.  To  be  sure,  no  man  can  be  brought 
to  Christ  without  that  working  of  the  Holy  Ghost  in  his 
heart.  ''Nemo  potest  venire  ad  me,  nisi  Pater  traxerit  eum." 
But  the  error  of  protestants  is  to  believe  that  this  energy  of 
the  Spirit  in  man's  soul  excludes  the  external  authoritative 
Magisterium.  The  power  of  the  Spirit  and  the  Magisterium 
are  two  causes  co-operating  to  produce  one  effect.  All  the 
texts  of  Scripture  alleged  by  the  protestants,  in  support  of 
this  system,  simply  prove  that  the  Holy  Ghost  moves  man 
to  Christian  belief  and  to  Christian  action;  and  the  same 
power  energizing  in  the  Church  vitalizes  it,  and  renders  it 
capable  of  its  great  mission  to  teach  all  mankind.  We  will 
leave  the  prosecution  of  this  train  of  argument  to  the  tract 
De  Locis  Theologicis,  and  content  ourselves  here  with  a  few 
a  posteriori  arguments.  In  the  first  place,  did  the  Holy 
Ghost  exert  such  action,  he  would,  doubtless,  move  to  a 
unanimity  of  faith ;  but  the  exact  contrary  is  in  fact  verified. 
The  sect  of  Presbyterians  are  split  on  some  of  the  basic 
truths  of  Christianity.  Can  the  Spirit  of  truth  inspire  them 
with  doctrines  directly  opposed  ?  The  recent  Briggs  contro- 
versy has  shown  the  lack  of  any  religious  harmony  in  the 
Presbyterian  church. 

I  will  here  excerpt  from  Milner's  End  of  Controversy  a 
few  examples  of  men  who  claimed  this  inspiration  of  the 
Holy  Ghost.  The  instances  are  based  upon  incontrovertible 
historical  data.  Montanus  and  his  sect  first  claimed  this 
private  inspiration ;  we  may  see  what  spirit  led  him  on,  since 


38  THE    PROTESTANT   CRITERION 

he  and  others  of  his  sect  hanged  themselves.  After  the 
great  i\postasy,  commonly  called  the  Reformation,  had  been 
inaugurated  by  Luther,  there  arose  the  sect  of  the  Ana- 
baptists, who  professed  that  it  had  been  commanded  them 
by  direct  communication  from  God  to  kill  all  the  wicked 
ones,  and  establish  a  kingdom  of  the  just.*  Bockhold,  a 
tailor  of  Leyden,  was  moved  by  the  private  inspiration  of  the 
Spirit  to  proclaim  himself  King  of  Sion.  He  married  by  the 
same  impulse  eleven  wives,  all  of  whom  he  put  to  death.  He 
declared  that  God  had  given  him  Amsterdam,  through  whose 
streets  his  followers  ran  naked  crying  out ;  *'Woe  to  Babylon ! 
Woe  to  the  wicked!"  Hermann,  the  Anabaptist,  was  moved 
to  proclaim  himself  the  Messiah,  and  to  order:  ''Kill  the 
priests ;  kill  all  the  magistrates  in  the  world !  Repent ;  your 
redemption  is  at  hand."  f 

All  these  excesses  were  done  upon  the  principle  and 
under  a  full  conviction  of  an  individual  inspiration.  In 
England,  Venner  was  inspired  to  rush  from  the  meeting- 
house in  Coleman  St.,  proclaiming  ''that  he  would  acknowl- 
edge no  sovereign  but  King  Jesus,  and  that  he  would  not 
sheathe  his  sword,  till  he  had  made  Babylon  [which  emblem- 
ized  monarchy]  a  hissing  and  a  curse,  not  only  in  England, 
but  also  in  foreign  countries ;  having  assurance  that  one  of 
them  would  put  to  flight  a  thousand,  and  two  of  them,  ten 
thousand."  On  the  scaffold,  he  protested  that  he  was  led 
by  Jesus.  The  records  of  George  Fox,  the  founder  of  Quaker- 
ism, furnish  abundant  evidence  of  the  abominable  absurd- 
ities into  which  this  supposed  inspiration  led  the  Friends. 
One  woman  rushed  naked»  into  Whitehall  Chapel,  when 
Cromwell  was  there.  Another  came  into  the  parliament 
house  with  a  trencher,  which  she  there  broke  in  pieces,  say- 
ing :  '  'Thus  shall  he  be  broken  in  pieces. ' '  Swedenborg  de- 
clared that  he  had  received,  at  an  eating  house  in  London, 
the  commission  from  Christ:  "I  am  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ, 
your  Creator  and  Redeemer.  I  have  chosen  you  to  explain 
to  men  the  interior  and  spiritual  sense  of  the  Scriptures.     I 

*  Sleidan  De  Stat,  et  Reip. 


t  Hist.  Abrege,  de  la  Re  forme  par  Brandt. 


THE   CATHOLIC    CRITERION  39 

will  dictate  to  you  what  you  are  to  write."  Here,  in  the 
very  position  of  the  system,  he  contradicts  himself;  for,  if 
Christ  gave  him  a  command  to  teach  men,  they  must  needs 
pay  heed  to  him.  Muhammad,  and  the  founder  of  the  foul 
sect  of  Mormons,  claimed  private  inspiration.  Guiteau 
claimed  the  moving  of  the  Spirit  in  the  slaying  of  President 
Garfield.  Wherefore,  w^e  maintain  that  the  system  of  private 
inspiration,  which  logically  leads  to  such  absurdities,  is  in 
itself  absurd  and  untenable. 

No  man  makes  a  better  argument  against  the  insuf- 
ficiency of  protestant  criteria  than  Marcus  Dods  in  his 
article  which  we  have  quoted.  If  any  man  will  weigh  this 
able  presentation  of  the  necessity  which  confronts  a  pro- 
testant with  the  vague  answer  which  Dods  renders  he 
must  be  convinced  that  protestants  are  at  sea  without 
compass  or  star. 

We  have  in  series  weighed  these  several  criterions  and 
found  them  wanting,  we  now  turn  to  the  Catholic 
Criterion. 

This  criterion  is  no  other  than  the  Catholic  Church,  into 
whose  custody  the  Holy  Waitings  have  been  given.  The 
Church  as  an  organized  body  has  various  elements  and  agen- 
cies, which  functionate  to  teach  man  that  truth  w^hich  the 
Redeemer  promised  should  be  taught  by  her  to  the  end  of 
time.  One  of  these  agencies  is  tradition,  which  is  simply  the 
solemn  witness  and  testimony  of  what  the  Church  taught  and 
believed  from  her  inception.  We  can  see  at  a  glance  that 
the  fountain  source  of  our  criterion  is  God  himself,  who,  as 
the  First  Cause,  wrought  this  effect  in  the  mind  of  the  writer. 
God  through  his  living  Magisterium  of  truth  tells  us  what  is 
Holy  Scripture,  and  what  is  not,  and  those  who  refuse  to  hear 
that  authoritative  voice  have  come  to  reject  even  the  Scrip- 
tures themselves.  Such  rejection  must  logically  follow 
from  disbelief  in  the  Church.  Augustine  was  never  truer 
than  when  he  said:  "Were  it  not  that  the  Authority  of  the 
Church  moves  me,  I  would  not  believe  the  Gospels."  Re- 
jecting the  authority  of  the  Church,  the  protestants  have 
passed  through  a  wondrous  transition.     Beginning  by  ador- 


40  THE   CATHOLIC    CRITERION 

ing  even  the  Masoretic  points,  they  have  gradually  lapsed  to 
such  a  point  where  those  who  believe  in  the  Bible  as  the  in- 
fallible Word  of  God  are  the  exceptions. 

There  remains  then  one  means,  and  one  means  only,  to 
teach  man  not  only  the  truths  of  Scripture,  but  also  the  Scrip- 
ture of  truths.  This  means  is  the  voice  of  God  through  the 
Church. 

The  mighty  mind  of  St.  Augustine  clearly  saw  and  pro- 
claimed the  necessity  of  the  Church  as  the  criterion  of  Scrip- 
ture. Arguing  with  a  Manichaean  he  declares:  *T  ask: 
Who  is  this  Manichaeus  ?  Ye  will  answer :  The  Apostle  of 
Jesus  Christ ;  I  believe  it  not ;  and  now  thou  art  not  able  to 
do  or  say  anything.  Thou  didst  promise  me  a  knowledge  of 
truth,  and  now  thou  obligest  me  to  believe  what  I  know  not. 
Perhaps  thou  wilt  read  me  the  Gospel,  and  thence  endeavor 
to  establish  the  existence  of  Manichaeus.  But  if  thou  findest 
one  who  not  yet  believes  the  Gospel  what  wilt  thou  say  to 
one  who  declares  to  thee :  I  do  not  believe  ?  And  I  would 
not  believe  the  Gospel  were  it  not  that  the  authority  of  the 
Catholic  Church  moved  me." 

In  placing  the  Church  as  the  supreme  judge  of  the  Canon 
w^e  do  not  assert  that  the  Church  has  power  to  make  an  in- 
spired book.  In  the  words  of  Melchior  Canus:  'This  is  to 
be  demonstrated  that  the  Church  of  the  faithful  still  on 
earth  can  not  write  a  canonical  book ;  but  that  it  can  define 
whether  of  not  a  disputed  book  be  canonical,  because  the 
solution  of  doubts  regarding  matters  of  faith  belongs  to  the 
present  Church.  For  it  is  necessary  that  there  should  be  a 
visible  judge  in  the  Church  to  decide  controversies,  for  the 
reason  that  God  fails  not  the  Church  in  necessar^^  things. 
And  whether  or  not  a  book  be  canonical  vitally  concerns 
faith.  Therefore  to  the  Church  on  earth  pertains  this  judg- 
ment. ...  I  firmly  believe  therefore  that  the  Church 
is  inspired  not  to  give  truth  and  authority  to  the  canonical 
books,  but  to  teach  that  these  and  not  others  are  canonical" 
(De  Locis  Theol.  7,8). 

The  Church  must  teach  us  two  things ;  what  books  are  of 
God ;  and  what  influence  God  had  in  such  books.  We  shall 
treat  first  of  God's  influence  upon  the  Holy  Books;  and. 


THE    PAPAL    ENCYCLICAL  41 

secondly,  of  the  official  list  of  those  books.  As  it  is  well  to 
know  the  nature  of  the  thing  sought,  before  going  in  quest 
of  it,  so  we  believe  that  we  shall  be  aided  in  constructing  the 
list  of  books  of  Holy  Scripture  by  a  knowledge  of  the  dis- 
tinguishing element  required  in  them,  before  admitting  them 
to  such  list.  Our  treatise  will  deal  first,  therefore,  with  the 
Nature  and  Extent  of  Inspiration,  and  secondly  with 
The  Canon. 

At  this  point  we  shall  submit  a  document  which,  though 
not  a  dogmatic  pronouncement,  is  still  an  authoritative  di- 
recting voice  from  the  Head  of  the  Church.  This  document 
is  the  encyclical  letter  'Trovidentissimus  Deus"  of  Pope  Leo 
Xni.  on  the  study  of  Holy  Scriptures,  which  appeared  on 
Nov.  1 8,  1893.  The  immediate  occasion  of  the  encyclical 
letter  was  a  defense  of  Lenorinant  by  d'Hulst  entitled  "La 
Question  Biblique"  which  was  published  at  Paris  in  1893. 
We  give  the  following  translation  of  the  papal  document 
^Trovidentissimus  Deus:" — "The  God  of  all  Providence, 
Who  in  the  adorable  designs  of  His  love  at  first  elevated 
the  human  race  to  the  participation  of  the  Divine  nature,  and 
afterwards  delivered  it  from  universal  guilt  and  ruin,  restoring 
it  to  its  primitive  dignity,  has,  in  consequence,  bestowed  upon 
man  a  splendid  gift  and  safeguard — making  known  to  him, 
by  supernatural  means,  the  hidden  mysteries  of  His  Divinity, 
His  wisdom  and  His  mercy.  For  although  in  Divine  revela- 
tion there  are  contained  some  things  which  are  not  beyond 
the  reach  of  unassisted  reason,  and  which  are  made  the  ob- 
jects of  such  revelation  in  order  'that  all  may  come  to  know 
them  with  facility ^  certainty,  and  safety  from  error,  yet  not  on 
this  account  can  supernatural  Revelation  be  said  to  be  abso- 
lutely necessary;  it  is  only  necessary  because  God  has  or- 
dained man  to  a  supernatural  end.'  [Cone.  Vat.  Sess.  HI.  cap. 
ii.  de  revel.]  This  supernatural  revelation,  according  to  the 
belief  of  the  universal  Church  is  contained  both  in  unwritten 
Tradition,  and  in  written  books,  which  are  therefore,  called 
sacred  and  canonical  because,  'being  written  under  the  in- 
spiration of  the  Holy  Ghost,  they  have  God  for  their  author, 
and  as  such  have  been  delivered  to  the  Church.'  [Ibid.] 
This  belief  has  been  perpetually  held  and  processed  by  the 


42  THE    PAPAL   ENCYCLICAL 

Church  in  regard  to  the  Books  of  both  Testaments ;  and  there 
are  well-known  documents  of  the  gravest  kind,  coming  down 
to  us  from  the  earhest  times,  which  proclaim  that  God,  Who 
spoke  first  by  the  Prophets,  then  by  His  own  mouth,  and 
lastly  by  the  Apostles,  composed  also  the  Canonical  Scrip- 
tures, [S.  Aug.  de  civ.  Dei.  XL,  3.]  and  that  these  are  His  own 
oracles  and  words — [S.  Clem.  Rom.  i  ad.  Cor.  45  ;  S.  Poly  carp, 
ad  Phil.  7 ;  S.  Iren  c.  haer.  II.,  28,  2] — a  Letter  written  by  our 
Heavenly  Father  and  transmitted  by  the  sacred  writers  to 
the  human  race  in  its  pilgrimage  so  far  from  its  heavenly 
countr}^  [S.  Chrys.  in  Gen.  horn.  2,  2 ;  S.  Aug.  inPs.  XXX., 
serm.,  2,  i ;  S.  Greg.  M.  ad  Theo.  ep.  IV.,  31.]  If,  then,  such 
and  so  great  is  the  excellence  and  dignity  of  the  Scriptures, 
that  God  Himself  has  composed  them,  and  that  they  treat 
of  God's  marvellous  mysteries,  counsels,  and  works,  it  fol- 
lows that  the  branch  of  sacred  Theology,  which  is  con- 
cerned with  the  defence  and  elucidation  of  these  Divine 
Books,  must  be  excellent  and  useful  in  the  highest  degree. 
"Now  We,  who  by  the  help  of  God,  and  not  without 
fruit,  have  by  frequent  Letters  and  exhortation  endeavored 
to  promote  other  branches  of  study  which  seem  capable  of 
advancing  the  glory  of  God,  and  contributing  to  the  salva- 
tion of  souls,  have  for  a  long  time  cherished  the  desire  to 
give  an  impulse  to  the  noble  science  of  Holy  Scripture,  and 
to  impart  to  Scripture  study  a  direction  suitable  to  the 
needs  of  the  present  day.  The  solicitude  of  the  Apostolic 
office  naturally  urges,  and  even  compels  us,  not  only  to 
desire  that  this  grand  source  of  Catholic  revelation  should 
be  made  safely  and  abundantly  accessible  to  the  flock  of 
Jesus  Christ,  but  also  not  to  suffer  any  attempt  to  defile  or 
corrupt  it,  either  on  the  part  of  those  who  impiously  or 
openly  assail  the  Scriptures,  or  of  those  who  are  led  astray 
into  fallacious  and  imprudent  novelties.  We  are  not  ignor- 
ant, indeed.  Venerable  Brethren,  that  there  are  not  a  few 
Catholics,  men  of  talent  and  learning,  who  do  devote  them- 
selves with  ardor  to  the  defence  of  the  Sacred  Writings  and 
to  making  them  known  and  better  understood.  But  whilst 
giving  to  these  the  commendation  they  deserve.  We  cannot 
but  earnestly  exhort  others  also,  from  whose  skill  and  piety 


THE    PAPAL    ENCYCLICAL  43 

and  learning  we  have  a  right  to  expect  good  results,  to  give 
themselves  to  the  same  most  praiseworthy  work.  It  is  Our 
wish  and  fervent  desire  to  see  an  increase  in  the  number  of 
the  approved  and  persevering  laborers  in  the  cause  of  Holy 
Scripture;  and  more  especially  that  those  whom  Divine 
Grace  has  called  to  Holy  Orders,  should,  day  by  day,  as 
their  state  demands,  display  greater  diligence  and  industry 
in  reading,  meditating  and  explaining  it. 

HOLY    SCRIPTURE    MOST    PROFITABLE    TO    DOCTRINE 
AND    MORALITY. 

"Among  the  reasons  for  which  the  Holy  Scripture  is  so 
worthy  of  commendation — in  addition  to  its  own  excellence 
and  to  the  homage  which  we  owe  to  God's  Word — the  chief 
of  all  is,  the  innumerable  benefits  of  which  it  is  the  source ; 
according  to  the  infallible  testimony  of  the  Holy  Ghost  Him- 
self, who  says :  'All  Scripture,  inspired  by  God  is  profitable 
to  teach,  to  reprove,  to  correct,  to  instruct  in  justice,  that 
the  man  of  God  may  be  perfect,  furnished  to  every  good 
work.'  [Tim.  HI.,  i6 — 17.J  That  such  was  the  purpose  of 
God  in  giving  the  Scripture  to  men  is  shown  by  the  example 
of  Christ  our  Lord  and  of  His  Apostles.  For  He  Himself 
who  'obtained  authority  by  miracles,  merited  belief  by 
authority,  and  by  belief  drew  to  himself  the  multitude'  [S. 
Aug.  de  util.  cred.  XIV.  32.]  was  accustomed  in  the  exercise 
of  His  Divine  Mission,  to  appeal  to  the  Scriptures.  He  uses 
them  at  times  to  prove  that  He  is  sent  by  God,  and  is  God 
Himself.  From  them  He  cites  instructions  for  His  disciples 
and  confirmation  of  His  doctrine.  He  vindicates  them  from 
the  calumnies  of  objectors;  He  quotes  them  against  Sad- 
ducees  and  Pharisees,  and  retorts  from  them  upon  Satan 
himself  when  he  dares  to  tempt  Him.  At  the  close  of  His 
life  His  utterances  are  from  the  Holy  Scripture,  and  it  is  the 
Scripture  that  He  expounds  to  His  disciples  after  His  resur- 
rection, until  He  ascends  to  the  glory  of  His  Father.  Faith- 
ful to  His  precepts,  the  Apostles,  although  He  Himself 
granted  'signs  and  wonders  to  be  done  by  their  hands,' 
[Act.  XIV.,  3.]  nevertheless  used  with  the  greatest  effect  the 
Sacred  Writings,  in  order  to  persuade  the  nations  every- 


44  THE    PAPAL    ENCYCLICAL 

where  of  the  wisdom  of  Christianity,  to  conquer  the  obsti- 
nacy of  the  Jews,  and  to  suppress  the  outbreak  of  heresy. 
This  is  plainly  seen  in  thedr  discourses,  especially  in  those  of 
St.  Peter ;  these  were  often  a  little  less  than  a  series  of  cita- 
tions from  the  Old  Testament  making  in  the  strongest  man- 
ner for  the  new  dispensation.  We  find  the  same  thing  in  the 
Gospels  of  St.  Matthew  and  St.  John  and  in  the  Catholic 
Epistles ;  and  most  remarkably  of  all  in  the  words  of  him, 
who  'boasts  that  he  learned  the  law  at  the  feet  of  Gamaliel, 
in  order  that,  being  armed  with  spiritual  weapons,  he  might 
afterwards  say  with  confidence,  'the  arms  of  our  warfare  are 
not  carnal  but  mighty  unto  God.'  '  [St.  Hieron.  de  stud. 
Script,  ad  PsLulin.  ep.  LIIL,  3.]  Let  all,  therefore  especially 
the  novices  of  the  ecclesiastical  army,  understand  how 
deeply  the  Sacred  Books  should  be  esteemed,  and  with  what 
eagerness  and  reverence  they  should  approach  this  great 
arsenal  of  heavenly  arms.  For  those  whose  duty  it  is  to 
handle  Catholic  doctrine  before  the  learned  or  the  unlearned 
will  nowhere  find  more  ample  matter  or  more  abundant  ex- 
hortation, whether  on  the  subject  of  God,  the  supreme 
Good  and  the  all-perfect  Being,  or  the  works  which  display 
His  glory  and  His  love.  Nowhere  is  there  anything  more 
full  or  more  express  on  the  subject  of  the  Saviour  of  the 
world  than  is  to  be  found  in  the  whole  range  of  the  Bible. 
As  St.  Jerome  says,  *to  be  ignorant  of  the  Scripture  is  not  to 
know  Christ.'  [in  Isaiam  Prol.]  In  its  pages  His  Image 
stands  out,  living  and  breathing;  diffusing  everywhere 
around  consolation  in  trouble,  encouragement  to  virtue  and 
attraction  to  the  love  of  God.  And  as  to  the  Church,  her 
institutions,  her  nature,  her  ofhce  and  her  gifts,  we  find  in 
Holy  Scripture  so  many  references  and  so  many  ready  and 
convincing  argimients,  that  as  St.  Jerome  again  most  truly 
says.  *A  man  who  is  well  grounded  in  the  testimonies  of 
the  Scripture  is  the  bulwark  of  the  Church. '  [in  Isaiam  LIV. 
12.]  And  if  we  come  to  morality  and  discipline,  an  apos- 
tolic man  finds  in  the  Sacred  Writings  abundant  and  excel- 
lent assistance;  most  holy  precepts,  gentle  and  strong  ex- 
hortation, splendid  examples  of  every  virtue,  and  finally  the 


THE    PAPAL    ENCYCLICAL  45 

promise  of  eternal  reward  and  the  threat  of  eternal  punish- 
ment, uttered  in  terms  of  solemn  import,  in  God's  name  and 
in  God's  own  words. 

"And  it  is  this  peculiar  and  singular  power  of  Holy  Scrip- 
ture, arising  from  the  inspiration  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  which 
gives  authority  to  the  sacred  orator,  fills  him  with  apostolic 
liberty  of  speech,  and  communicates  force  and  power  to 
his  eloquence.  For  those  who  infuse  into  their  efforts  the 
spirit  and  strength  of  the  Word  of  God,  speak  'not  in  word 
only,  but  in  power  also,  and  in  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  in  much 
fulness.'  [I  Thess.  I.,  5].  Hence,  those  preachers  are  foolish 
and  improvident  who,  in  speaking  of  religion  and  proclaim- 
ing the  things  of  God,  use  no  words  but  those  of  human 
science  and  human  prudence,  trusting  to  their  own  reasonings 
rather  than  to  those  of  God.  Their  discourses  may  be 
brilliant  and  fine,  but  they  must  be  feeble  and  they  must  be 
cold,  for  they  are  without  the  fire  of  the  utterance  of  God 
[Jerem.  XXHL,  29]  and  they  must  fall  far  short  of  that  mighty 
power  which  the  speech  of  God  possesses :  'for  the  Word  of 
God  is  living  and  effectual,  and  more  piercing  than  any  two- 
edged  sword ;  and  reaching  unto  the  division  of  the  soul  and 
the  spirit.'  [Hebr.  IV.,  12].  But,  indeed  those  who  have  a 
right  to  speak  are  agreed  that  there  is  in  the  Holy  Scripture 
an  eloquence  that  is  wonderfully  varied  and  rich  and  worthy 
of  great  themes.  This  St.  Augustine  thoroughly  understood 
and  has  abundantly  set  forth.  [De  doctr.  Chr.  IV.,  6,  7.] 
This,  also,  is  confirmed  by  the  best  preachers  of  all  ages, 
who  have  gratefully  acknowledged  that  they  owed  their  re- 
pute chiefly  to  the  assiduous  use  of  the  Bible,  and  to  de- 
vout meditation  on  its  pages. 

'The  Holy  Fathers  well  knew  all  this  by  practical  experi- 
ence, and  they  never  cease  to  extol  the  Sacred  Scripture  and 
its  fruits.  In  innumerable  passages  of  their  writings  we 
find  them  applying  to  it  such  phrases  as  *an  inexhaustible 
treasury  of  heavenly  doctrine,'  [S.  Chrys.  in  Gen.  Horn.  XXL, 
2  ;  Horn.  IX.,  3  ;  S.  Aug.  de  Disc.  Christ.  II.]  or  *an  overflowing 
fountain  of  salvation,'  [S.  Athan.  ep.  jest.  XXXIX.]  or  put- 
ting it  before  us  as  fertile  pastures  and  beautiful  gardens  in 
which  the  flock  of  the  Lord  is  marvellously  refreshed  and 


46  THE    PAPAL    ENCYCLICAL 

delighted.  [S.  Aug.  serm.  XXVI.,  24;  S.  Ambr.  in  Ps. 
CXVIIL,  serm.  XIX.,  2]  Let  us  listen  to  the  words  of  St. 
Jerome,  in  his  Epistle  to  Nepotian:  'Often  read  the  divine 
Scriptures;  yea,  let  holy  reading  be  always  in  thy  hand; 
study  that  which  thou  thy  self  must  preach.  .  .  .  Let 
the  speech  of  the  priest  be  ever  seasoned  with  Scriptural 
reading.'  [S.  Hier.  de  vita  cleric,  ad  Nepot.]  St  Gregory 
the  Great,  than  w^hom  no  one  has  more  admirably  described 
the  pastoral  office,  writes  in  the  same  sense :  'Those,'  he  says, 
'who  are  zealous  in  the  work  of  preaching  must  never  cease 
the  study  of  the  Written  Word  of  God.'  [S.  Greg.  M.,  Regul. 
past.  II.,  II.  (al.  22); Moral.  XVII.,  26  (al.  14).  St.  Augustine, 
however,  warns  us  that  'vainly  does  the  preacher  utter  the 
Word  of  God  exteriorly  unless  he  listens  to  it  interiorly;' 
[S.  Aug.  serm.  CLXXIX.,  i.]  and  St.  Gregory  instructs  sacred 
orators  'first  to  find  in  Holy  Scripture  the  knowledge  of 
themselves,  and  then  carry  it  to  others,  lest  in  reproving 
others  they  forget  themselves.'  [S.  Greg.  M.  Regul.  past., 
III.,  24  (al.  14).]  Admonitions  such  as  these  had,  indeed, 
been  uttered  long  before  by  the  Apostolic  voice  which  had 
learnt  its  lesson  from  Christ  Himself,  Who  'began  to  do  and 
teach.'  It  was  not  to  Timothy  alone,  but  to  the  whole  order 
of  the  clergy,  that  the  command  was  addressed :  'Take  heed 
to  thyself  and  to  doctrine ;  be  earnest  in  them.  For  in  doing 
this  thou  shalt  both  save  thyself  and  them  that  hear  thee.' 
[I.  Tim.  IV.,  16.]  For  the  saving  and  for  the  perfection  of 
ourselves  and  of  others  there  is  at  hand  the  very  best  of 
help  in  the  Holy  Scriptures,  as  the  Book  of  Psalms,  among 
others,  so  constantly  insists ;  but  those  only  will  find  it  who 
bring  to  this  divine  reading  not  only  docility  and  attention, 
but  also  piety  and  an  innocent  life.  For  the  sacred  Scrip- 
ture is  not  like  other  books.  Dictated  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  it 
contains  things  of  the  deepest  importance,  which,  in  many 
instances  are  most  difficult  and  obscure.  To  understand 
and  explain  such  things  there  is  always  required  the  'coming' 
[S.  Hier.  in  Mic.  I.,  10.]  of  the  same  Holy  Spirit ;  that  is  to  say. 
His  light  and  His  grace,  and  these,  as  the  Royal  Psalmist 
so  frequently  insists,  are  to  be  sought  by  htmible  prayer  and 
guarded  by  holiness  of  life. 


THE    PAPAL    ENCYCLICAL  47 

WHAT    THE    BIBLE    OWES    TO    THE    CATHOLIC    CHURCH. 

"It  is  in  this  that  the  watchful  eye  of  the  Church  shines 
forth"  conspicuously.  By  admirable  laws  and  regulations, 
she  has  shown  herself  solicitous  that  'the  celestial  treasure 
of  the  Sacred  Books,  so  bountifully  bestowed  upon  man  by 
the  Holy  Spirit,  should  not  lie  neglected.'  [Cone.  Trid.  sess. 
V.  decret.  de  reform.  I.]  She  has  prescribed  that  a  consider- 
able portion  of  them  shall  be  read  and  piously  reflected  upon 
by  all  her  ministers  in  the  daily  office  of  the  sacred  psalmody. 
She  has  ordered  that  in  cathedral  churches,  in  monasteries, 
and  in  other  convents  in  which  study  can  conveniently  be 
pursued,  they  shall  be  expounded  and  interpreted  by  capable 
men ;  and  she  has  strictly  commanded  that  her  children  shall 
be  fed  with  the  saving  words  of  the  Gospel  at  least  on  Sun- 
days and  solemn  feasts.  [Ibid,  i — 2.]  Moreover,  it  is  owing 
to  the  wisdom  and  exertions  of  the  Church  that  there  has 
always  been  continued,  from  century  to  century  that  cultiva- 
tion of  Holy  Scripture  which  has  been  so  remarkable  and  has 
borne  such  ample  fruit. 

"And  here,  in  order  to  strengthen  Our  teaching  and  Our 
exhortations,  it  is  well  to  recall  how,  from  the  beginning  of 
Christianity,  all  who  have  been  renowned  for  holiness  of  life 
and  sacred  learning,  have  given  their  deep  and  constant  atten- 
tion to  Holy  Scripture.  If  we  consider  the  immediate  disciples 
of  the  Apostles,  St.  Clement  of  Rome,  St.  Ignatius  of  Antioch, 
St.  Polycarp — or  the  apologists,  such  as  St.  Justin  and  St. 
Irenaeus,  we  find  that  in  their  letters  and  books,  whether  in 
defence  of  the  Catholic  Faith  or  in  its  commendation,  they 
drew  faith,  strength,  and  unction  from  the  Word  of  God. 
When  there  arose,  in  various  Sees,  catechetical  and  theologi- 
cal schools,  of  which  the  most  celebrated  were  those  of  Alex- 
andria and  of  Antioch,  there  was  little  taught  in  those  schools 
but  what  was  contained  in  the  reading,  the  interpretation 
and  the  defence  of  the  divine  written  word.  From  them 
came  forth  numbers  of  Fathers  and  writers  whose  laborious 
studies  and  admirable  writings  have  justly  merited  for  the 
three  following  centuries  the  appellation  of  the  golden  age 
of  biblical  exegesis.     In  the  Eastern  Church  the  greatest 


48  THE    PAPAL    ENCYCLICAL 

name  of  all  is  Origen — a  man  remarkable  alike  for  penetra- 
tion of  genius  and  persevering  labor ;  from  whose  numerous 
works  and  his  great  Hexapla  almost  all  have  drawn  who 
came  after  himi.  Others  who  have  widened  the  field  of  this 
science  may  also^  be  named,  as  especially  eminent ;  thus, 
Alexandria  could  boast  of  St.  Clement  and  St.  Cyril ;  Pales- 
tine, of  Eusebius  and  the  other  St.  Cyril ;  Cappadocia,  of  St. 
Basil  the  Great  and  the  two  Gregories,  of  Nazianzus  and 
Nyssa ;  Antioch,  of  St.  John  Chrysostom,  in  whom  the  science 
of  Scripture  was  rivalled  by  the  splendor  of  his  eloquence. 
In  the  Western  Church  there  are  as  many  names  as  great : 
TertuUian,  St.  Cyprian,  St.  Hilary,  St.  Ambrose,  St.  Leo  the 
Great,  St.  Gregory  the  Great ;  most  famous  of  all,  St.  Augus- 
tine and  St.  Jerome,  of  whom  the  former  was  so  marvellously 
acute  in  penetrating  the  sense  of  God's  Word  and  so  fertile 
in  the  use  that  he  made  of  it  for  the  promotion  of  the  Catho- 
lic truth,  and  the  latter  has  received  from  the  Church,  by 
reason  of  his  pre-eminent  knowledge  of  Scripture  and  his 
labors  in  promoting  its  use,  the  name  of  the  'great  Doctor.' 
[See  the  Collect  on  his  feast,  September  30.]  From  this 
period  down  to  the  eleventh  century,  although  biblical 
studies  did  not  flourish  with  the  same  vigor  and  the  same 
fruitfulness  as  before,  yet  they  did  flourish,  and  principally 
by  the  instrumentality  of  the  clergy.  It  was  their  care  and 
solicitude  that  selected  the  best  and  most  useful  things  that 
the  ancients  had  left,  arranged  them  in  order,  and  published 
them  with  additions  of  their  own — as  did  S.  Isidore  of 
Seville,  Venerable  Bede,  and  Alcuin,  among  the  most  prom- 
inent; it  was  they  who  illustrated  the  sacred  pages  with 
'glosses'  or  short  commentaries,  as  we  see  in  Walafrid  Strabo 
and  St.  Anselm  of  Laon,  or  expended  fresh  labor  in  securing 
their  integrity,  as  did  St. Peter  Damian  and  Blessed  Lanfranc. 
In  the  twentieth  century  many  took  up,  with  great  success, 
the  allegorical  exposition  of  Scripture.  In  this  kind,  St. 
Bernard  is  preeminent ;  and  his  writings,  it  may  be  said,  are 
Scripture  all  through.  With  the  age  of  the  scholastics  came 
fresh  and  welcome  progress  in  the  study  of  the  Bible.  That 
the  scholastics  were  solicitous  about  the  genuineness  of  the 
Latin  version  is  evident  from  the  Correctoria  Biblica,  or  list 


THE    PAPAL    ENCYCLICAL  49 

of  emendations,  which  they  have  left.  But  they  expended 
their  labors  and  industry  chiefly  on  interpretation  and  ex- 
planation. To  them  we  owe  the  accurate  and  clear  distinc- 
tion, such  as  had  not  been  given  before,  of  the  various  senses 
of  the  sacred  words;  the  assignment  of  the  value  of  each 
'sense'  in  theology;  the  division  of  books  into  parts,  and  the 
summaries  of  the  various  parts;  the  investigation  of  the 
objects  of  the  writers ;  the  demonstration  of  the  connection 
of  sentence  with  sentence,  and  clause  with  clause ;  all  of  which 
is  calculated  to  throw  much  light  on  the  more  obscure  pas- 
sages of  the  Sacred  Volume.  The  valuable  work  of  the 
scholastics  in  Holy  Scripture  is  seen  in  their  theological 
treatises  and  in  their  Scripture  commentaries;  and  in  this 
respect  the  greatest  name  among  them  all  is  St.  Thomas 
Aquinas. 

"When  our  predecessor,  Clement  V.,  established  chairs 
of  Oriental  literature  in  the  Roman  College  and  in  the  princi- 
pal Universities  of  Europe,  Catholics  began  to  make  more 
accurate  investigation  on  the  original  text  of  the  Bible  as 
well  as  on  the  Latin  version.  The  revival  amongst  us  of 
Greek  learning,  and,  much  more,  the  happy  invention  of  the 
art  of  printing,  gave  a  strong  impetus  to  biblical  studies.  In 
a  brief  space  of  time,  innumerable  editions,  especially  of  the 
Vulgate,  poured  from  the  press  and  were  diffused  through- 
out the  Catholic  world;  so  honored  and  loved  was  Holy 
Scripture  during  that  very  period  against  which  the  enemies 
of  the  Church  direct  their  calumnies.  Nor  must  we  forget 
how  many  learned  men  there  were,  chiefly  among  the  re- 
ligious orders,  who  did  excellent  work  for  the  Bible  between 
the  Council  of  Vienna  and  that  of  Trent ;  men  who,  by  the 
employment  of  modern  means  and  appliances,  and  by  the 
tribute  of  their  own  genius  and  learning,  not  only  added  to 
the  rich  store  of  ancient  times,  but  prepared  the  way  for  the 
succeeding  century,  the  century  which  followed  the  Council 
of  Trent,  when  it  almost  seemed  that  the  great  age  of  the 
Fathers  had  returned.  For  it  is  well-known,  and  We  recall 
it  with  pleasure,  that  Our  predecessors  from  Pius  IV.  to 
Clement  VIII.  caused  to  be  prepared  the  celebrated  editions 
of  the  Vulgate  and  the  Septuagint,  which,  having  been  pub- 


50  THE    PAPAL    ENCYCLICAL 

lished  by  the  command  and  authority  of  Sixtus  V.  and  of  the 
same  Clement,  are  now  in  common  use.  At  this  time,  more- 
over, were  carefully  brought  out  various  other  ancient  ver- 
sions of  the  Bible,  and  the  Polyglots  of  Antwerp  and  of  Paris, 
most  important  for  the  investigation  of  the  true  meaning  of 
the  text ;  nor  is  there  any  one  book  of  either  Testament  which 
did  not  find  more  than  one  expositor,  nor  any  grave  question 
which  did  not  profitably  exercise  the  ability  of  many  in- 
quirers, among  whom  there  are  not  a  few — more  especially 
of  those  who  made  most  use  of  the  Fathers — ^who  have  ac- 
quired great  reputation.  From  that  time  downwards  the 
labor  and  solicitude  of  Catholics  have  never  been  wanting ; 
for,  as  time  went  on,  eminent  scholars  have  carried  on  bibli- 
cal study  with  success,  and  have  defended  Holy  Scripture 
against  rationalism  with  the  same  weapons  of  philology  and 
kindred  sciences  with  which  it  had  been  attacked.  The 
calm  and  fair  consideration  of  what  has  been  said  will  clearly 
show  that  the  Church  has  never  failed  in  taking  due  meas- 
ures to  bring  the  Scriptures  within  reach  of  her  children,  and 
that  she  has  ever  held  fast  and  exercised  profitably  that 
guardianship  conferred  upon  her  by  Almighty  God  for  the 
protection  and  glory  of  His  Holy  Word ;  so  that  she  has  never 
required,  nor  does  she  now  require  any  stimulation  from 
without. 

HOW    TO    STUDY    HOLY    SCRIPTURE. 

"We  must  now.  Venerable  Brethren,  as  our  purpose  de- 
mands, impart  to  you  such  counsels  as  seem  best  suited  for 
carrying  on  successfully  the  study  of  biblical  science. 

"But  first  it  must  be  clearly  understood  w^hom  we  have  to 
oppose  and  contend  against,  and  what  are  their  tactics  and 
their  arms.  In  earlier  times  the  contest  was  chiefly  with 
those  who,  relying  on  private  judgment  and  repudiating  the 
divine  traditions  and  teaching  office  of  the  Church,  held  the 
Scriptures  to  be  the  one  source  of  revelation  and  the  final 
appeal  in  matters  of  faith.  Now  we  have  to  meet  the  Ration- 
alists, true  children  and  inheritors  of  the  older  heretics,  who, 
trusting  in  their  turn  to  their  own  way  of  thinking,  have  re- 
jected even  the  scraps  and  remnants  of  Christian  belief  which 


THE   PAPAL    ENCYCLICAL  61 

had  been  handed  down  to  them.  They  deny  that  there  is 
any  such  thing  as  revelation  or  inspiration,  or  Holy  Scrip- 
ture at  all ;  they  see,  instead,  only  the  forgeries  and  falsehoods 
of  men;  they  set  down  the  Scripture  narratives  as  stupid 
fables  and  lying  stories :  the  prophecies  and  oracles  of  God 
are  to  them  either  predictions  made  up  after  the  event  or 
forecasts  formed  by  the  light  of  nature;  the  miracles  and 
wonders  of  God's  power  are  not  what  they  are  said  to  be,  but 
the  startling  effects  of  natural  law,  or  else  mere  tricks  and 
myths;  and  the  Apostolic  Gospels  and  writings  are  not  the 
work  of  the  apostles  at  all.  These  detestable  errors,  whereby 
they  think  they  destroy  the  truth  of  the  divine  books,  are 
obtruded  on  the  world  as  the  peremptory  pronouncements 
of  a  newly  invented  'free  science ;'  a  science,  however,  which 
is  so  far  from  final  that  they  are  perpetually  modifying  and 
supplementing  it.  And  there  are  some  of  them,  who,  not- 
withstanding their  impious  opinions  and  utterances  about 
God,  and  Christ,  the  Gospels  and  the  rest  of  Holy  Scripture, 
would  fain  be  considered  both  theologians  and  Christians  and 
men  of  the  Gospel,  and  who  attempt  to  disguise  by  such  hon- 
orable names  their  rashness  and  their  pride.  To  them  we 
must  add  not  a  few  professors  of  other  sciences  who  approve 
their  views  and  give  them  assistance,  and  are  urged  to  attack 
the  Bible  by  similar  intolerance  of  revelation.  And  it  is  de- 
plorable to  see  these  attacks  growing  every  day  more  numer- 
ous and  more  severe.  It  is  sometimes  men  of  learning  and 
judgment  who  are  assailed ;  but  these  have  little  difficulty  in 
defending  themselves  from  evil  consequences.  The  efforts 
and  arts  of  the  enemy  are  chiefly  directed  against  the  more 
ignorant  masses  of  the  people.  They  diffuse  their  deadly 
poison  by  means  of  books,  pamphlets,  and  newspapers ;  they 
spread  it  by  addresses  and  by  conversation ;  they  are  found 
everywhere ;  and  they  are  in  possession  of  numerous  schools, 
taken  by  violence  from  the  Church,  in  which,  by  ridicule  and 
scurrilous  jesting,  they  pervert  the  credulous  and  unformed 
minds  of  the  young  to  the  contempt  of  Holy  Scripture. 
Should  not  these  things,  Venerable  Brethren,  stir  up  and  set 
on  fire  the  heart  of  every  pastor,  so  that  to  this  'knowledge, 
falsely  so  called,'  [i.  Tim.   IV.,  20.]  may  be  opposed  the 


52  THE    PAPAL    ENCYCLICAL 

ancient  and  true  science  which  the  Church,  through  the 
Apostles  has  received  from  Christ,  and  that  Holy  Scripture 
may  find  the  champions  that  are  needed  in  so  momentous 
a  battle? 

"Let  our  first  care,  then,  be  to  see  that  in  seminaries  and 
academical  institutions  the  study  of  Holy  Scripture  be  placed 
on  such  a  footing  as  its  own  importance  and  the  circum- 
stances of  the  time  demand.  With  this  view,  the  first  thing 
which  requires  attention  is  the  wise  choice  of  professors. 
Teachers  of  Sacred  Scripture  are  not  to  be  appointed  at 
haphazard  out  of  the  crowd ;  but  they  must  be  men  whose 
character  and  fitness  are  proved  by  their  love  of  the  Bible 
and  their  long  familiarity  with  it  and  by  suitable  learning 
and  study. 

*'It  is  a  matter  of  equal  importance  to  provide  in  time  for 
a  continuous  succession  of  such  teachers ;  and  it  will  be  well 
wherever  this  can  be  done,  to  select  young  men  of  good 
promise  who  have  successfully  accomplished  their  theologi- 
cal course,  and  to  set  them  apart  exclusive  for  Holy  Scripture, 
affording  them  facilities  for  full  and  complete  studies.  Pro- 
fessors, thus  chosen  and  thus  prepared,  may  enter,  with  con- 
fidence, on  the  task  that  is  appointed  for  them ;  and  that  they 
may  carry  out  their  work  well  and  profitably,  let  them  take 
heed  to  the  instructions  we  now  proceed  to  give. 

"At  the  commencement  of  a  course  of  Holy  Scripture, 
let  the  professor  strive  earnestly  to  form  the  judgment  of 
the  young  beginners  so  as  to  train  them  equally  to  defend 
the  Sacred  Writings  and  to  penetrate  their  meaning.  This 
is  the  object  of  the  treatise  which  is  called  'Introduction.' 
Here  the  student  is  taught  how  to  prove  the  integrity  and 
authority  of  the  Bible,  how  to  investigate  and  ascertain  its 
true  sense,  and  how  to  meet  and  refute  objections.  It  is 
needless  to  insist  upon  the  importance  of  making  these  pre- 
liminary studies  in  an  orderly  and  thorough  fashion,  with 
the  accompaniment  and  assistance  of  Theology ;  for  the  whole 
subsequent  course  must  rest  on  the  foundation  thus  laid 
and  make  use  of  the  light  thus  acquired.  Next,  the  teacher 
will  turn  his  attention  to  that  more  fruitful  division  of  Scrip- 
ture science  which  has  to  do  with  interpretation,  wherein  is 


THE    PAPAL    ENCYCLICAL  53 

imparted  the  method  of  using  the  Word  of  God  for  the  ad- 
vantage of  reHgion  and  piety.  We  recognize,  without  hesi- 
tation, that  neither  the  extent  of  the  matter  nor  the  time 
at  disposal  allows  each  single  Book  of  the  Bible  to  be  sepa- 
rately gone  through.  But  the  teaching  should  result  in  a 
definite  and  ascertained  method  of  interpretation — and, 
therefore,  the  professor  should  equally  avoid  the  mistake  of 
giving  a  mere  taste  of  every  Book,  and  of  dwelling  at  too 
great  a  length  on  a  part  of  one  Book.  If  most  schools  cannot 
do  what  is  done  in  large  institutions — take  the  students 
through  the  whole  of  one  or  two  Books  continuously  and 
with  a  certain  development — yet  at  least  those  parts  which 
are  selected  should  be  treated  with  suitable  fulness ;  in  such 
a  way  that  the  students  may  learn  from  the  sample  that  is 
put  before  them  to  love  and  use  the  remainder  of  the  Sacred 
Book  during  the  whole  of  their  lives.  The  professor,  follow- 
ing the  tradition  of  antiquity,  will  make  use  of  the  Vulgate 
as  his  text ;  for  the  Council  of  Trent  decreed  that  'in  public 
lectures,  disputations,  preaching,  and  exposition,'  [Sess.  IV., 
deer,  de  edit,  et  usu  sacr.  libror.]  the  Vulgate  is  the  'authentic' 
version ;  and  this  is  the  existing  custom  of  the  Church.  At 
the  same  time,  the  other  versions,  which  Christian  antiquity 
has  approved,  should  not  be  neglected,  more  especially  the 
more  ancient  MSS.  For,  although  the  meaning  of  the  He- 
brew and  Greek  is  substantially  rendered  by  the  Vulgate, 
nevertheless,  wherever  there  may  be  ambiguity  or  want  of 
clearness,  the  'examination  of  older  tongues,'  [De  doctr.  chr. 
III.,  4.]  to  quote  St.  Augustine,  will  be  useful  and  advantage- 
ous. But  in  this  matter  we  need  hardly  say  that  the  great- 
est prudence  is  required,  for  the  'office  of  a  commentator,'  as 
St.  Jerome  says,  'is  to  set  forth  not  what  he  himself  would 
prefer,  but  what  his  author  says.'  [Ad  Pammachium.]  The 
question  of  'reading'  having  been,  when  necessary,  carefully 
discussed,  the  next  thing  is  to  investigate  and  expound  the 
meaning.  And  the  first  counsel  to  be  given  is  this:  that 
the  more  our  adversaries  contend  to  the  contrary,  so  much 
the  more  solicitously  should  we  adhere  to  the  received  and 
approved  canons  of  interpretation.  Hence,  whilst  weighing 
the  meaning  of  words,  the  connection  of  ideas,  the  parallel- 


54  THE    PAPAL    ENCYCLICAL 

ism  of  passages,  and  the  like,  we  should  by  all  means  make 
use  of  such  illustrations  as  can  be  drawn  from  opposite  erudi- 
tion of  an  external  sort ;  but  this  should  be  done  with  caution 
so  as  not  to  bestow  on  questions  of  this  kind  more  labor  and 
time  than  are  spent  on  the  Sacred  Books  themselves,  and  not 
to  overload  the  minds  of  the  students  with  a  mass  of  infor- 
mation that  will  be  rather  a  hindrance  than  a  help. 

HOLY    SCRIPTURE  AND  THEOLOGY;  INTERPRETATION; 
THE    FATHERS. 

'The  professor  may  now  safely  pass  on  to  the  use  of 
Scripture  in  matters  of  theology.  On  this  head  it  must  be 
observed  that,  in  addition  to  the  usual  reasons  which  make 
ancient  writings  more  or  less  difficult  to  understand,  there 
are  some  which  are  peculiar  to  the  Bible.  For  the  language 
of  the  Bible  is  employed  to  express,  under  the  inspiration  of 
the  Holy  Ghost,  many  things  which  are  beyond  the  power 
and  scope  of  the  reason  of  man — that  is  to  say.  Divine  mys- 
teries and  all  that  is  related  to  them.  There  is  sometimes  in 
such  passages  a  fulness  and  a  hidden  depth  of  meaning  which 
the  letter  hardly  expresses  and  which  the  laws  of  interpre- 
tation hardly  warrant.  Moreover,  the  literal  sense  itself  fre- 
quently admits  other  senses,  adapted  to  illustrate  dogma  or 
to  confirm  morality.  Wherefore,  it  must  be  recognized  that 
the  Sacred  Writings  are  wrapped  in  a  certain  religious  obscur- 
ity, and  that  no  one  can  enter  into  their  interior  without 
a  guide;  [S.  Hier.  ad.  Paulin.  de  studio  Script,  ep.  LIIL,  4.] 
God  so  disposing,  as  the  holy  Fathers  commonly  teach,  in 
order  that  men  may  investigate  them  with  greater  ardor 
and  earnestness,  and  that  what  is  attained  with  difficulty 
may  sink  more  deeply  into  the  mind  and  heart,  and,  most 
of  ail,  that  they  may  understand  that  God  has  delivered 
the  Holy  Scripture  to  the  Church,  and  that  in  reading  and 
making  use  of  His  Word,  they  must  follow  the  Church  as 
their  guide  and  their  teacher.  St.  Irenaeus  long  since  laid 
down,  that  where  the  charismata  of  God  were,  there  the  truth 
was  to  be  learnt,  and  the  Holy  Scripture  was  safely  inter- 
preted by  those  who  had  the  Apostolic  succession.  [C.  haer. 
IV.  26,  5.]      His  teaching  and  that  of  other  holy  Fathers,  is 


THE    PAPAL    ENCYCLICAL  55 

taken  up  by  the  Council  of  the  Vatican,  which,  in  renewing 
the  decree  of  Trent  declared  its  'mind  '  to  be  this — that  'in 
things  of  faith  and  morals,  belonging  to  the  building  up  of 
Christian  doctrine,  that  is  to  be  considered  the  true  sense 
of  Holy  Scripture,  which  has  been  held  and  is  held  by  our 
Holy  Mother  the  Church,  whose  place  it  is  to  judge  of  the 
true  sense  and  interpretation  of  the  Scriptures ;  and,  there- 
fore, that  it  is  permitted  to  no  one  to  interpret  Holy  Scrip- 
ture against  such  sense  or  also  against  the  unanimous  agree- 
ment of  the  Fathers.'  [Sess.  HI.,  cap.  IL,  de  revel. ;  cf.  Cone. 
Trid.  sess.  IV.  decret.  de  edit,  et  usu  sacr.  libror.]  By  this  most 
wise  decree  the  Church  by  no  means  prevents  or  restrains 
the  pursuit  of  Biblical  science,  but  rather  protects  it  from 
error,  and  largely  assists  its  real  progress.  A  wide  field  is 
still  left  open  to  the  private  student,  in  which  his  hermeneut- 
ical  skill  may  display  itself  with  signal  effect  and  to  the  ad- 
vantage of  the  Church.  On  the  one  hand,  in  those  passages 
of  Holy  Scripture,  which  have  not  as  yet  received  a  certain 
and  definite  interpretation,  such  labors  may,  in  the  benig- 
nant providence  of  God,  prepare  for  and  bring  to  maturity 
the  judgment  of  the  Church;  on  the  other,  in  passages  al- 
ready defined,  the  private  student  may  do  work  equally 
valuable,  either  by  setting  them  forth  more  clearly  to  the 
flock  or  more  skillfully  to  the  scholars,  or  by  defending  them 
more  powerfully  from  hostile  attack.  Wherefore  the  first 
and  dearest  object  of  the  Catholic  commentator  should  be  to 
interpret  those  passages  which  have  received  an  authentic 
interpretation  either  from  the  Sacred  writers  themselves, 
imder  the  inspiration  of  the  Holy  Ghost  (as  in  many  places 
of  the  New  Testament) ,  or  from  the  Church,  under  the  assist- 
ance of  the  same  Holy  Spirit,  whether  by  her  solemn 
judgment  or  her  ordinary  and  universal  magisterium  [Cone. 
Vat.  sess.  HI.,  cap.  II.,  de  fide.] — to  interpret  these  passages 
in  that  identical  sense,  and  to  prove  by  all  the  resources  of 
science,  that  sound  hermeneutical  laws  admit  of  no  other 
interpretation.  In  the  other  passages  the  analogy  of  faith 
should  be  followed,  and  Catholic  doctrine,  as  authoritatively 
proposed  by  the  Church,  should  be  held  as  the  supreme  law ; 
for,  seeing  that  the  same  God  is  the  author  both  of  the 


56  THE    PAPAL    ENCYCLICAL 

Sacred  Books  and  of  the  doctrine  committed  to  the  Church, 
it  is  clearly  impossible  that  any  teaching  can,  by  legitimate 
means,  be  extracted  from  the  former,  which  shall,  in  any 
respect,  be  at  variance  with  the  latter.  Hence  it  follows 
that  all  interpretation  is  foolish  or  false  which  either  makes 
the  Sacred  writers  disagree  one  with  another,  or  is  opposed 
to  the  doctrine  of  the  Church.  The  professor  of  Holy  Scrip- 
ture, therefore,  amongst  other  recommendations,  must  be 
well  acquainted  with  the  whole  circle  of  Theology  and  deeply 
read  in  the  commentaries  of  the  Holy  Fathers  and  doctors, 
and  in  other  interpreters  of  mark.  [Ibid.]  This  is  incul- 
cated by  St.  Jerome,  and  still  more  frequently  by  St.  Augus- 
tine, who  thus  justly  complains,  *If  there  is  no  branch  of 
teaching,  however  humble  and  easy  to  learn,  which  does  not 
require  a  master,  what  can  be  a  greater  sign  of  rashness  and 
pride  than  to  refuse  to  study  the  Books  of  the  Divine  myster- 
ies by  the  help  of  those  who  have  interpreted  them?'  [Ad 
Honorat.  dentil,  cred.  XVH.,  35.]  The  other  Fathers  have 
said  the  same,  and  have  confirmed  it  by  their  example,  for 
they  *  endeavored  to  acqure  the  understanding  of  the  Holy 
Scriptures  not  by  their  own  lights  and  ideas,  but  from  the 
writing  and  authority  of  the  ancients,  who,  in  their  turn,  as 
we  know,  received  the  rule  of  interpretation  in  direct  line 
from  the  Apostles.'  [Rufinus  Hist.  eccl.  LI.,  9.]  The  holy 
Fathers  'to  whom,  after  the  Apostles,  the  Church  owes  its 
growth — who  have  planted,  watered,  built,  governed,  and 
cherished  it,'  [S.  Aug.  C,  Julian.  H.,  10.  37.]  the  holy  Fathers, 
We  say,  are  of  supreme  authority,  whenever  they  all  interpret 
in  one  and  the  same  manner  any  text  of  the  Bible,  as  pertain- 
ing to  the  doctrine  of  faith  and  morals ;  for  their  unanimity 
clearly  evinces  that  such  interpretation  has  come  down  from 
the  Apostles  as  a  matter  of  Catholic  faith.  The  opinion  of 
the  Fathers  is  also  of  very  great  weight  when  they  treat  of 
these  matters  in  their  capacity  of  doctors  unofficially;  not 
only  because  they  excel  in  their  knowledge  of  revealed  doc- 
trine and  in  their  acquaintance  with  many  things  w^hich  are 
useful  in  understanding  the  Apostolic  Books,  but  because 
they  are  men  of  eminent  sanctity  and  of  ardent  zeal  for  the 
truth,  on  whom  God  has  bestowed  a  more  ample  measure  of 


THE    PAPAL    ENCYCLICAL  57 

His  light.  Wherefore  the  expositor  should  make  it  his  duty 
to  follow  their  footsteps  with  all  reverence,  and  to  use  their 
labors  with  intelligent  appreciation. 

''But  he  must  not  on  that  account  consider  that  it  is  for- 
bidden, when  just  cause  exists,  to  push  inquiry  and  exposi- 
tion beyond  what  the  Fathers  have  done ;  provided  he  care- 
fully observes  the  rule  so  wisely  laid  down  by  St.  Augustine 
— not  to  depart  from  the  literal  and  obvious  sense,  except 
only  where  reason  makes  it  untenable  or  necessity  requires ; 
[De  Gen.  ad  lift.  LVIII.  CC,  7.  13.]  a  rule  to  which  it  is  the 
more  necessary  to  adhere  strictly  in  these  times,  when  the 
thirst  for  novelty  and  the  unrestrained  freedom  of  thought 
make  the  danger  of  error  most  real  and  proximate.  Neither 
should  those  passages  be  neglected  which  the  Fathers  have 
understood  in  an  allegorical  or  figurative  sense,  more  especi- 
ally when  such  interpretation  is  justified  by  the  literal,  and 
when  it  rests  on  the  authority  of  many.  For  this  method 
of  interpretation  has  been  received  by  the  Church  from  the 
Apostles,  and  has  been  approved  by  her  own  practice,  as  the 
holy  Liturgy  attests ;  although  it  is  true  that  the  holy  Fathers 
did  not  thereby  pretend  directly  to  demonstrate  dogmas  of 
faith,  but  used  it  as  a  means  of  promoting  virtue  and  piety, 
such  as,  by  their  own  experience,  they  knew  to  be  most 
valuable.  The  authority  of  other  Church  interpreters  is  not 
so  great ;  but  the  study  of  Scripture  has  always  continued  to 
advance  in  the  Church,  and,  therefore,  these  commentaries 
also  have  their  own  honorable  place,  and  are  serviceable  in 
many  ways  for  the  refutation  of  assailants  and  the  explana- 
tion of  difficulties.  But  it  is  most  unbecoming  to  pass  by, 
in  ignorance  or  contempt,  the  excellent  work  which  Catholics 
have  left  in  abundance,  and  to  have  recourse  to  the  work  of 
non-Catholics — and  to  seek  in  them,  to  the  detriment  of 
sound  doctrine  and  often  to  the  peril  of  faith,  the  explanation 
of  passages  on  which  Catholics  long  ago  have  successfully 
employed  their  talent  and  their  labor.  For  although  the 
studies  of  non-Catholics,  used  with  prudence,  may  some- 
times be  of  use  to  the  Catholic  student,  he  should,  neverthe- 
less, bear  well  in  mind — as  the  Fathers  also  teach  in  numer- 
ous passages  [Cfr.  Clem.  Alex.  Strom.  VII.,  16 ;  Orig.  de  princ. 


58  THE    PAPAL    ENCYCLICAL 

IV.,  8;  in  Levit.  horn.  4.  8;  Tertull.  de  praescr.  15,  seqq.;  S. 
Hilar.  Pict.  in  Matth.  13.  i.] — that  the  sense  of  Holy  Scrip- 
ture can  nowhere  be  found  incorrupt  outside  the  Church, 
and  cannot  be  expected  to  be  found  in  writers  who,  being 
without  the  true  faith,  only  gnaw  the  bark  of  Sacred  Scrip- 
ture, and  never  attain  its  pith. 

"Most  desirable  is  it,  and  most  essential,  that  the  whole 
teaching  of  Theology  should  be  pervaded  and  animated  by 
the  use  of  the  Divine  Word  of  God.  This  is  what  the  Fathers 
and  the  greatest  theologians  of  all  ages  have  desired  and  re- 
duced to  practice.  It  is  chiefly  out  of  the  Sacred  Writings 
that  they  endeavored  tp  proclaim  and  establish  the  Articles 
of  Faith  and  the  truths  therewith  connected,  and  it  was  in 
them,  together  with  Divine  Tradition,  that  they  found  the 
refutation  of  heretical  error,  and  the  reasonableness,  the 
true  meaning,  and  the  mutual  relation  of  the  truths  of 
Catholicism.  Nor  will  any  one  wonder  at  this  who  considers 
that  the  Sacred  Books  hold  such  an  eminent  position  among 
the  sources  of  revelation  that  without  their  assiduous  study 
and  use,  Theology  cannot  be  placed  on  a  true  footing,  or 
treated  as  its  dignity  demands.  For  although  it  is  right 
and  proper  that  students  in  academies  and  schools  should  be 
chiefly  exercised  in  acquiring  a  scientific  knowledge  of  dogma 
by  means  of  reasoning  from  the  Articles  of  Faith  to  their 
consequences,  according  to  the  rules  of  approved  and  sound 
philosophy — nevertheless  the  judicious  and  instructed  theo- 
logians will  by  no  means  pass  by  that  method  of  doctrinal 
demonstration  which  draws  its  proof  from  the  authority  of 
the  Bible ;  'for  (Theology)  does  not  receive  her  first  principles 
from  any  other  science,  but  immediately  from  God  by  revel- 
ation. And,  therefore,  she  does  not  receive  of  other  sciences 
as  from  a  superior,  but  uses  them  as  her  inferiors  or  hand 
maids.'  [S.,  Greg.  M.  Moral.  XX.,  9  (al.  11).]  It  is  this  view 
of  doctrinal  teaching  which  is  laid  down  and  recommended 
by  the  prince  of  theologians,  St.  Thomas  of  Aquin;  [Summ. 
theol.  p.  I.,  q.  I.,  a.  5  ad  2.]  who  moreover  shows — such 
being  the  essential  character  of  Christian  Theology — how 
she  can  defend  her  own  principles  against  attack :  If  the  ad- 
versary,' he  says,  'do  but  grant  any  portion  of  the  Divine 


THE    PAPAL    ENCYCLICAL  59 

revelation,  we  have  an  argument  against  him ;  thus,  against 
a  heretic  we  can  employ  Scripture  authority,  and  against 
those  who  deny  one  article,  we  can  use  another.  But  if  our 
opponent  reject  Divine  revelation  entirely,  there  is  no  way 
left  to  prove  the  Articles  of  Faith  by  reasoning ;  we  can  only 
solve  the  difficulties  which  are  raised  against  them.'  [Ibid  a. 
8.]  Care  must  be  taken,  then,  that  beginners  approach  the 
study  of  the  Bible  well  prepared  and  furnished;  otherwise, 
just  hopes  will  be  frustrated,  or,  perchance,  what  is  worse, 
they  will  unthinkingly  risk  the  danger  of  error,  falling  an 
easy  prey  to  the  sophisms  and  labored  erudition  of  the 
Rationalists.  The  best  preparation  will  be  a  conscientious 
application  to  philosophy  and  theology  under  the  guidance 
of  St.  Thomas  of  Aquin,  and  a  thorough  training  therein — as 
We  ourselves  have  elsewhere  pointed  out  and  directed.  By 
this  means,  both  in  Biblical  studies  and  in  that  part  of 
Theology  which  is  called  positive,  they  will  pursue  the  right 
path  and  make  satisfactory  progress. 

the  authority  of  holy  scripture;  modern 
criticism;  physical  science. 

"To  prove,  to  expound,  to  illustrate  Catholic  doctrine  by 
the  legitimate  and  skillful  interpretation  of  the  Bible  is 
much ;  but  there  is  a  second  part  of  the  subject  of  equal  im- 
portance and  equal  diffixulty— the  maintenance  in  the  strong- 
est possible  way  of  its  full  authority.  This  cannot  be  done 
completely  or  satisfactorily  except  by  means  of  the  living 
and  proper  magisteritim  of  the  Church.  The  Church  by 
reason  of  her  wonderful  propagation,  her  distinguished  sanct- 
ity, and  inexhaustible  fecundity  in  good,  her  Catholic  unity, 
and  her  unshaken  stability,  is  herself  a  great  and  perpetual 
motive  of  credibility,  and  an  unassailable  testimony  to  her 
own  Divine  mission.'  [Cone.  Vat.  sess.  III.  c.  II.  de  fide.] 
But  since  the  divine  and  infallible  magisterium  of  the  Church 
rests  also  on  Holy  Scripture ;  the  first  thing  to  be  done  is  to 
vindicate  the  trustworthiness  of  Sacred  records,  at  least  as 
human  documents,  from  which  can  be  clearly  proved,  as 
from  primitive  and  authentic  testimony,  the  Divinity  and 
the  mission  of  Christ  our  Lord,  the  institution  of  a  hierarchi- 


60  THE    PAPAL    ENCYCLICAL 

cal  Church  and  the  primacy  of  Peter  and  of  his  successors. 
It  is  most  desirable,  therefore,  that  there  should  be  numer- 
ous members  of  the  clergy  well  prepared  to  enter  on  a  con- 
test of  this  nature,  and'  to  repulse  hostile  assaults,  chiefly 
trusting  in  the  armor  of  God  recommended  by  the  Apostle, 
[Eph.  VL,  13,  seqq.]  but  also  not  unaccustomed  to  modern 
methods  of  attack.  This  is  beautifully  alluded  to  by  St. 
John  Chrysostom,  when  describing  the  duties  of  priests: 
'We  must  use  every  endeavor  that  the  'Word  of  God  may 
dwell  in  us  abundantly'  [Cfr.,  Coloss.  III.,  16.]  not  merely  for 
one  kind  of  a  fight  must  we  be  prepared — for  the  contest  is 
many-sided  and  the  enemy  is  of  every  sort ;  and  they  do  not 
all  use  the  same  weapons  nor  make  their  onset  in  the  same 
way.  Wherefore  it  is  needful  that  the  man  who  has  to  con- 
tend against  all  should  be  acquainted  with  the  engines  and 
the  arts  of  all — that  he  should  be  at  once  archer  and  slinger, 
commandant  and  officer,  general  and  private  soldier,  foot- 
soldier  and  horseman,  skilled  in  sea-fight  and  in  siege;  for 
unless  he  knows  every  trick  and  turn  of  war,  the  devil  is 
well  able,  if  only  a  single  door  be  left  open,  to  get  in  his 
fierce  bands  and  carry  off  the  sheep.'  [De  Sacerdotio  IV.,  4.] 
The  sophisms  of  the  enemy  and  his  manifold  arts  of  attack 
we  have  already  touched  upon.  Let  us  now  say  a  word  of 
advice  on  the  means  of  defence.  The  first  means  is  the 
study  of  the  Oriental  languages  and  of  the  art  of  criticism. 
These  two  acquirements  are  in  these  days  held  in  high  estim- 
ation, and,  therefore,  the  clergy,  by  making  themselves  fully 
acquainted  with  themi  as  time  and  place  may  demand,  will 
the  better  be  able  to  discharge  their  office  with  becoming 
credit;  for  they  must  make  themselves  'all  to  all,'  [I.  Cor. 
IX.,  22.]  always  'ready  to  satisfy  every  one  that  asketh  them 
a  reason  for  the  hope  that  is  in  them.'  [I.  Peter  III.,  25.] 
Hence  it  is  most  proper  that  professors  of  Sacred  Scripture 
and  theologians  should  master  those  tongues  in  which  the 
Sacred  Books  were  originally  written ;  and  it  would  be  well 
that  Church  students  also  should  cultivate  them,  more 
especially  those  who  aspire  to  academic  degrees.  And  en- 
deavors should  be  made  to  establish  in  all  academic  institu- 
tions— as  has  already  been  laudably  done  in  many — chairs 


•      THE    PAPAL    ENCYCLICAL  61 

of  the  other  ancient  languages,  especially  the  Semitic,  and 
of  subjects  connected  therewith,  for  the  benefit,  principally, 
of  those  who  are  intended  to  profess  Sacred  literature. 
These  latter,  with  a  similar  object  in  view,  should  make 
themselves  well  and  thoroughly  acquainted  with  the  art  of 
true  criticism.  There  has  arisen,  to  the  great  detriment  of 
religion,  an  inept  method,  dignified  by  the  name  of  the 
'higher  criticism,'  which  pretends  to  judge  the  origin,  in- 
tegrity and  authority  of  each  Book  from  internal  indications 
alone.  It  is  clear  on  the  other  hand,  that  in  historical  ques- 
tions, such  as  the  origin  and  handing  down  of  writings,  the 
witness  of  history  is  of  primary  importance,  and  that  histori- 
cal investigation  should  be  made  with  the  utmost  care ;  and 
that  in  this  matter  internal  evidence  is  seldom  of  great  value, 
except  as  confirmation.  To  look  upon  it  in  any  other  light 
will  be  to  open  the  door  to  many  evil  consequences.  It  will 
make  the  enemies  of  religion  much  more  bold  and  confident 
in  attacking  and  mangling  the  Sacred  Books;  and  this 
vaunted  'higher  criticism'  will  resolve  itself  into  the  reflection 
of  the  bias  and  the  prejudice  of  the  critics.  It  will  not 
throw  on  the  Scripture  the  light  which  is  sought,  or  prove  of 
any  advantage  to  doctrine ;  it  will  only  give  rise  to  disagree- 
ment and  dissension,  those  sure  notes  of  error,  which  the 
critics  in  question  so  plentifully  exhibit  in  their  own  per- 
sons; and  seeing  that  most  of  them  are  tainted  with  false 
philosophy  and  rationalism,  it  must  lead  to  the  elimination 
from  the  Sacred  Writings  of  all  prophecy  and  miracle,  and  of 
everything  else  that  is  outside  the  natural  order. 

'Tn  the  second  place,  we  have  to  contend  against  those 
who,  making  an  evil  use  of  physical  science,  minutely  scruti- 
nize the  Sacred  Books  in  order  to  detect  the  writers  in  a  mis- 
take, and  to  take  occasion  to  vilify  its  contents.  Attacks 
of  this  kind,  bearing  as  they  do  on  matters  of  sensible  ex- 
perience, are  peculiarly  dangerous  to  the  masses,  and  also  to 
the  young  who  are  beginning  their  literary  studies ;  for  the 
young,  if  they  lose  their  reverence  for  the  Holy  Scripture  on 
one  or  more  points,  are  easily  led  to  give  up  believing  in  it 
altogether.  It  need  not  be  pointed  out  how  the  nature  of 
science,  just  as  it  is  so  admirably  adapted  to  show  forth  the 


62  THE   PAPAL    ENCYCLICAL 

glory  of  the  Great  Creator,  provided  it  is  taught  as  it  should 
be,  so,  if  it  be  perversely  imparted  to  the  youthful  intelligence, 
it  may  prove  most  fatal  in  destroying  the  principles  of  true 
philosophy  and  in  the  corruption  of  morality.  Hence,  to 
the  professor  of  Sacred  Scripture  a  knowledge  of  natural 
science  will  be  of  very  great  assistance  in  detecting  such 
attacks  on  the  Sacred  Books,  and  in  refuting  them.  There 
can  never,  indeed,  be  any  real  discrepancy  between  the 
theologian  and  the  physicist,  as  long  as  each  confines  him- 
self within  his  own  lines,  and  both  are  careful,  as  St.  Augus- 
tine warns  us,  'not  to  make  rash  assertions,  or  to  assert  what 
is  not  known  as  known.'  [In.  Gen.  op.  imperj.  IX.,  30.]  If 
dissension  should  arise  between  them,  here  is  the  rule  also 
laid  down  by  St.  Augustine,  for  the  theologian:  'whatever 
they  can  really  demonstrate  to  be  true  of  physical  nature, 
we  must  show  to  be  capable  of  reconciliation  with  our  Scrip- 
tures ;  and  whatever  they  assert  in  their  treatises,  which  is 
contrary  to  these  Scriptures  of  ours,  that  is  to  Catholic  faith, 
we  must  either  prove  it  as  well  as  we  can  to  be  entirely  false, 
or  at  all  events  we  must,  without  the  smallest  hesitation, 
believe  it  to  be  so.'  \DeGen,  ad  litt.,  I.,  21 — 41.]  To  under- 
stand how  just  is  the  rule  here  formulated  we  must  remem- 
ber, first,  that  the  Sacred  writers,  or  to  speak  more  accu- 
rately, the  Holy  Ghost  'Who  spoke  by  them,  did  not  intend 
to  teach  men  these  things  (that  is  to  say,  the  essential  nature 
of  the  things  of  the  visible  universe) ,  things  is  no  way  profit- 
able tmto  salvation.'  [S.  Aug.  ih.  II.,  9 — 20.]  Hence  they 
did  not  seek  to  penetrate  the  secrets  of  nature,  but  rather 
described  and  dealt  with  things  in  more  or  less  figurative 
language,  or  in  terms  which  were  commonly  used  at  the  time, 
and  which  in  many  instances  are  in  daily  use  at  this  day, 
even  by  the  most  eminent  men  of  science.  Ordinary  speech 
primarily  and  properly  describes  what  comes  under  the 
senses ;  and  somewhat  in  the  same  way  the  Sacred  writers — 
as  |';the  Angelic  Doctor  also  reminds  us — 'went  by  what 
sensibly  appeared,'  [Summa  theol.  p.  i.  q.  LXXX.,  a.  i.  ad  3.] 
or  put  down  what  God,  speaking  to  men,  signified,  in  the 
way  men  could  understand  and  were  accustomed  to. 


THE    PAPAL    ENCYCLICAL  63 

''The  unshrinking  defence  of  the  Holy  Scripture,  how- 
ever, does  not  require  that  we  should  equally  uphold  all  the 
opinions  which  each  of  the  Fathers  or  the  more  recent  in- 
terpreters have  put  forth  in  explaining  it ;  for  it  may  be  that, 
in  commenting  on  passages  where  physical  matters  occur, 
they  have  sometimes  expressed  the  ideas  of  their  own  times, 
and  thus  made  statements  which  in  these  days  have  been 
abandoned  as  incorrect.  Hence,  in  their  interpretations, 
we  must  carefully  note  what  they  lay  down  as  belonging  to 
faith,  or  as  intimately  connected  with  faith — what  they  are 
unanimous  in.  For  *  in  those  things  w^hich  do  not  come 
under  the  obligation  of  faith,  the  saints  were  at  liberty  to 
hold  divergent  opinions,  just  as  we  ourselves  are,'[/'n  Sent.ll., 
Dist.II.,q.I.,a.3.]  according  to  the  saying  of  St.  Thomas.  And 
in  another  place  he  says  most  admirably :  'when  philosophers 
are  agreed  upon  a  point,  and  it  is  not  contrary  to  our  faith, 
it  is  safer,  in  my  opinion,  neither  to  lay  down  such  a  point 
as  a  dogma  of  faith,  even  though  it  is  perhaps  so  presented 
by  the  philosophers,  nor  to  reject  it  as  against  faith,  lest  we 
thus  give  to  the  wise  of  this  world  an  occasion  of  despising 
our  faith.'  [Opusc.  X.]  The  Catholic  interpreter,  although 
he  should  show  that  those  facts  of  natural  science  which  in- 
vestigators affirm  to  be  now  quite  certain  are  not  contrary 
to  the  Scripture  rightly  explained,  must,  nevertheless,  always 
bear  in  mind,  that  much  which  has  been  held  and  proved  as 
certain  has  afterwards  been  called  in  question  and  rejected. 
And  if  writers  on  physics  travel  outside  the  boundaries  of 
their  own  branch,  and  carry  their  erroneous  teaching  into 
the  domain  of  philosophy,  let  them  be  handed  over  to  phil- 
osophers for  refutation. 

INSPIRATION    INCOMPATIBLE    WITH    ERROR. 

"The  principles  here  laid  down  will  apply  to  cognate 
sciences  and  especially  to  history.  It  is  a  lamentable  fact 
that  there  are  many  who  with  great  labor  carry  out  and 
publish  investigations  on  the  monuments  of  antiquity,  the 
manners  and  institutions  of  nations  and  other  illustrative 
subjects,  and  whose  chief  purpose  in  all  this  is  to  find  mis- 
takes in  the  Sacred  Writings  and  so  to  shake  and  weaken 


64  THE   PAPAL    ENCYCLICAL 

their  authority.  Some  of  these  writers  display  not  only 
extreme  hostility,  but  the  greatest  unfairness ;  in  their  eyes 
a  profane  book  or  ancient  document  is  accepted  without 
hesitation,  whilst  the  Scripture,  if  they  only  find  in  it  a 
suspicion  of  error,  is  set  down  with  the  slightest  possible 
discussion  as  quite  untrustworthy.  It  is  true,  no  doubt, 
that  copyists  have  made  mistakes  in  the  text  of  the  Bible ; 
this  question,  when  it  arises,  should  be  carefully  considered 
on  its  merits,  and  the  fact  not  too  easily  admitted,  but  only 
in  those  passages  where  the  proof  is  clear.  It  may  also  hap- 
pen that  the  sense  of  a  passage  remains  ambiguous,  and  in 
this  case  good  hermeneutical  methods  will  greatly  assist  in 
clearing  up  the  obscurity.  But  it  is  absolutely  wrong  and 
forbidden,  either  to  narrow  inspiration  to  certain  parts  only 
of  Holy  Scripture,  or  to  admit  that  the  Sacred  Writer  has 
erred.  For  the  system  of  those  who,  in  order  to  rid  them- 
selves of  those  difficulties,  do  not  hesitate  to  concede  that 
Divine  inspiration  regards  the  things  of  faith  and  morals, 
and  nothing  beyond,  because  (as  they  wrongly  think),  in  a 
question  of  the  truth  or  falsehood  of  a  passage,  we  should 
consider  not  so  much  what  God  has  said  as  the  reason  and 
purpose  which  He  had  in  mind  w^hen  saying  it — this  system 
cannot  be  tolerated.  For  all  the  Books  which  the  Church 
receives  as  sacred  and  canonical  are  written  wholly  and 
entirely,  with  all  their  parts,  at  the  dictation  of  the  Holy 
Ghost-;  and  so  far  is  it  from  being  possible  that  any  error 
can  co-exist  with  inspiration,  that  inspiration  not  only  is 
essentially  incompatible  with  error,  but  excludes  and  re- 
jects it  as  absolutely  and  necessarily  as  it  is  impossible  that 
God  Himself,  the  Supreme  Truth,  can  utter  that  which  is  not 
true.  This  is  the  ancient  and  unchanging  faith  of  the  Church 
solemnly  defined  in  the  councils  of  Florence  and  of  Trent, 
and  finally  confirmed  and  more  expressly  formulated  by  the 
Council  of  the  Vatican.  These  are  the  words  of  the  last: 
The  Books  of  the  Old  and  New  Testament,  whole  and  entire, 
with  all  their  parts,  as  enumerated  by  the  decree  of  the 
same  Council  (Trent)  and  in  the  ancient  Latin  Vulgate,  are 
to  be  received  as  Sacred  and  Canonical.  And  the  Church 
holds  them  as  Sacred  and  Canonical,  not  because  having 


THE   PAPAL    ENCYCLICAL  65 

been  composed  by  human  industry,  they  were  afterwards 
approved  by  her  authority;  nor  only  because  they  contain 
revelation  without  error;  but  because,  having  been  written 
under  the  inspiration  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  they  have  God  for 
their  Author.'  [Sess.  III.  C.  II.,  de  Rev.]  Hence,  because  the 
Holy  Ghost  employed  men  as  His  instruments,  we  cannot, 
therefore,  say  that  it  was  these  inspired  instruments  who, 
perchance,  have  fallen  into  error,  and  not  the  primary  Au- 
thor. For,  by  supernatural  power,  He  so  moved  and  im- 
pelled them  to  write — He  was  so  present  to  them — that  the 
things  which  He  ordered,  and  those  only,  they,  first,  rightly 
understood,  then  willed  faithfully  to  write  down,  and  finally 
expressed  in  apt  words  and  with  infallible  truth.  Other- 
wise, it  could  not  be  said  that  He  was  the  Author  of  the 
entire  Scripture.  Such  has  always  been  the  persuasion  of 
the  Fathers.  Therefore,'  says  St.  Augustine,  'since  they 
wrote  the  things  w^hich  He  showed  and  uttered  to  them,  it 
cannot  be  pretended  that  He  is  not  the  Writer ;  for  His  mem- 
bers executed  what  their  Head  dictates.'  [De  consensu 
Evangel.  L.  i,  C.  35.]  And  St.  Gregory  the  Great  thus  pro- 
nounces :  'most  superfluous  it  is  to  inquire  who  wrote  these 
things — we  loyally  believe  the  Holy  Ghost  to  be  the 
author  of  the  Book.  He  wrote  it  Who  dictated  it  for  writ- 
ing ;  He  wrote  it  Who  inspired  its  execution. '  [Praef.  in  J  oh, 
n.  2.] 

''It  follows  that  those  who  maintain  that  an  error  is  pos- 
sible in  any  genuine  passage  of  the  Sacred  Writings,  either 
pervert  the  Catholic  notion  of  inspiration,  or  make  God  the 
author  of  such  error.  And  so  emphatically  were  all  the 
Fathers  and  Doctors  agreed  that  the  Divine  Writings,  as 
left  by  the  hagiographers,  are  free  from  all  error,  that  they 
labored  earnestly,  with  no  less  skill  than  reverence,  to  recon- 
cile with  each  other  those  numerous  passages  which  seem  at 
variance — the  very  passages  which  in  a  great  measure  have 
been  taken  up  by  the  'higher  criticism' ;  for  they  were  unan- 
imous in  laying  it  down,  that  those  writings,  in  their  entirety 
and  in  all  their  parts  were  equally  from  the  afflatus  of  Al- 
mighty God,  and  that  God,  speaking  by  the  Sacred  Writers, 
could  not  set  down  anything  that  was  not  true.     The  words 


66  THE   PAPAL    ENCYCLICAL 

of  St.  Augustine  to  St.  Jerome  may  simi  up  what  they  taught : 
*0n  my  own  part  I  confess  to  your  charity  that  it  is  only  to 
those  books  of  Scripture  which  are  now  called  canonical  that 
I  have  learned  to  pay  such  honor  and  reverence  as  to  be- 
lieve most  firmly  that  none  of  their  writers  has  fallen  into 
any  error.  And  if  in  these  Books  I  meet  anything  which 
seems  contrary  to  truth,  I  shall  not  hesitate  to  conclude 
either  that  the  text  is  faulty,  or  that  the  translator  has  not 
expressed  the  meaning  of  the  passage,  or  that  I  myself  do 
not  understand.'     [Ep.  LXXVIL,  i,  et  crebrius  alibi.] 

*'But  to  imdertake  fully  and  perfectly,  and  with  all  the 
weapons  of  the  best  science,  the  defence  of  the  Holy  Bible 
is  far  more  than  can  be  looked  for  from  the  exertion  of 
commentators  and  theologians  alone.  It  is  an  enterprise 
in  which  we  have  a  right  to  expect  the  co-operation  of  all 
those  Catholics  who  have  acquired  reputation  in  any  branch 
of  learning  whatever.  As  in  the  past,  so  at  the  present 
time,  the  Church  is  never  without  the  graceful  support  of 
her  accomplished  children;  may  their  service  to  the  Faith 
grow  and  increase !  For  there  is  nothing  which  We  believe 
to  be  more  needful  than  that  truth  should  find  defenders 
more  powerful  and  more  numerous  than  the  enemies  it  has 
to  face ;  nor  is  there  anything  which  is  better  calculated  to 
impress  the  masses  with  respect  for  truth  than  to  see  it 
boldly  proclaimed  by  learned  and  distinguished  men.  More- 
over, the  bitter  tongues  of  objectors  will  be  silenced,  or  at 
least  they  will  not  dare  to  insist  so  shamelessly  that  faith 
is  the  enemy  of  science,  when  they  see  that  scientific  men 
of  eminence  in  their  profession  show  towards  faith  the  most 
raarked  honor  and  respect.  Seeing,  then,  that  those  can 
do  so  much  for  the  advantage  of  religion  on  whom  the  good- 
ness of  Almighty  God  has  bestowed,  together  with  the 
grace  of  the  faith,  great  natural  talent,  let  such  men,  in  this 
bitter  conflict  of  which  the  Holy  Scripture  is  the  object, 
select  each  of  them  the  branch  of  study  most  suitable  to 
his  circumstances,  and  endeavor  to  excel  therein,  and  thus 
be  prepared  to  repulse  with  credit  and  distinction  the  as- 
saults on  the  Word  of  God.  And  it  is  Our  pleasing  duty 
to  give  deserved  praise  to  a  work  which  certain  Catholics 


THE   PAPAL   ENCYCLICAL  67 

have  taken  up — that  is  to  say,  the  formation  of  societies 
and  the  contribution  of  considerable  sums  of  money,  for 
the  purpose  of  supplying  studious  and  learned  men  with 
every  kind  of  help  and  assistance  in  carrying  out  complete 
studies.  Truly  an  excellent  fashion  of  investing  money, 
and  well  suited  to  ;the  times  in  which  we  live !  The  less 
hope  of  public  patronage  there  is  for  Catholic  study,  the 
more  ready  and  the  more  abundant  should  be  the  liberality 
of  private  persons — those  to  whom  God  has  given  riches 
thus  willingly  making  use  of  their  means  to  safeguard  the 
treasure  of  His  revealed  doctrine. 

SUMMARY. 

"In  order  that  all  these  endeavors  and  exertions  may 
really  prove  advantageous  to  the  cause  of  the  Bible,  let 
scholars  keep  steadfastly  to  the  principles  which  We  have 
in  this  Letter  laid  down:  Let  them  loyally  hold  that  God, 
the  Creator  and  Ruler  of  all  things,  is  also  the  Author  of  the 
Scriptures — and  that,  therefore,  nothing  can  be  proved 
either  by  physical  science  or  archaeology  which  can  really 
contradict  the  Scriptures.  If,  then,  apparent  contradic- 
tion be  met  with,  every  effort  should  be  made  to  remove 
it.  Judicious  theologians  and  commentators  should  be  con- 
sulted as  to  what  is  the  true  or  most  probable  meaning  of 
the  passage  in  discussion,  and  hostile  arguments  should  be 
carefully  weighed.  Even  if  the  difficulty  is  after  all  not 
cleared  up,  and  the  discrepancy  seems  to  remain,  the  con- 
test must  not  be  abandoned ;  truth  cannot  contradict  truth, 
and  we  may  be  sure  that  some  mistake  has  been  made  either 
in  the  interpretation  of  the  Sacred  Words,  or  in  the  polem- 
ical discussion  itself;  and  if  no  such  mistake  can  be  de- 
tected, we  must  then  suspend  judgment  for  the  time  being. 
There  have  been  objections  without  number  perse veringly 
directed  against  the  Scripture  for  many  a  long  year,  which 
have  been  proved  to  be  futile  and  are  now  never  heard  of ; 
and  not  infrequently  interpretations  have  been  placed  on 
certain  passages  of  Scripture  (not  belonging  to  the  rule  of 
faith  or  morals)  which  have  been  rectified  by  more  careful 
investigations.     As  time   goes  on,  mistaken  views  die  and 


68  THE    PAPAL  ENCYCLICAL 

disappear;  but  'truth  remaineth  and  groweth  stronger  for- 
ever and  ever.'  [3  Esdr.  IV.,  38.]  Wherefore,  as  no  one 
should  be  so  presumptuous  as  to  think  that  he  understands 
the  whole  of  the  Scripture,  in  which  St.  Augustine  himself 
confessed  there  was  more  that  he  did  not  know,  than  that  he 
knew,  [Ad  lanuar.  ep.  LV.,  21]  so,  if  he  should  come  on  any- 
thing that  seems  incapable  of  solution,  he  must  take  to 
heart  the  cautious  rule  of  the  same  holy  Doctor:  'It  is 
better  even  to  be  oppressed  by  unknown  but  useful  signs, 
than  to  interpret  them  uselessly  and  thus  to  throw  off  the 
yoke  only  to  be  caught  in  the  trap  of  error.'     [De  doctr.  chr. 

III.,  9,  18]. 

"As  to  those  who  pursue  the  subsidiary  studies  of  which 
We  have  spoken,  if  they  honestly  and  modestly  follow  the 
counsel  we  have  given — if  by  their  pen  and  their  voice  they 
make  their  studies  profitable  against  the  enemies  of  truth, 
and  useful  in  saving  the  young  from  the  loss  of  their  faith — 
they  may  justly  congratulate  themselves  on  their  worthy 
service  to  the  Sacred  Writings,  and  on  affording  to  Catholic- 
ism that  assistance  which  the  Church  has  a  right  to  expect 
from  the  piety  and  learning  of  her  children. 

"Such,  Venerable  Brethren,  are  the  admonitions  and  the 
instructions  which,  by  the  help  of  God,  We  have  thought  it 
well,  at  the  present  moment  to  offer  to  you  on  the  study  of 
Holy  Scripture.  It  will  now  be  your  province  to  see  that 
what  We  have  said  be  observed  and  put  in  practice  with  all 
due  reverence  and  exactness;  that  so.  We  may  prove  our 
gratitude  to  God  for  the  communication  to  man  of  the  Words 
of  His  Wisdom,  and  that  all  the  good  results  so  much  to  be 
desired  may  be  realized,  especially  as  they  affect  the  train- 
ing of  the  students  of  the  Church,  which  is  our  own  great 
solicitude  and  the  Church's  hope.  Exert  yourself  with 
willing  alacrity,  and  use  your  authority  and  your  persuasion 
in  order  that  these  studies  may  be  held  in  just  regard  and 
may  flourish  in  Seminaries  and  in  educational  institutions 
which  are  under  your  jurisdiction.  Let  them  flourish  in 
completeness  and  in  happy  success,  under  the  direction  of 
the  Church,  in  accordance  with  the  salutary  teaching  and 
example  of  the  Holy  Fathers,  and  the  laudable  traditions 


REVELATION  AND   INSPIRATION  69 

of  antiquity ;  and,  as  time  goes  on,  let  them  be  widened  and 
extended  as  the  interests  and  glory  of  truth  may  require — 
the  interests  of  that  Catholic  Truth,  which  comes  from  above, 
the  never-failing  source  of  man's  salvation.  Finally,  We 
admonish  with  paternal  love,  all  students  and  ministers  of 
the  Church  always  to  approach  the  Sacred  Writings  with 
reverence  and  piety ;  for  it  is  impossible  to  attain  to  the  profit- 
able imderstanding  thereof  unless  the  arrogance  of  'earthly' 
science  be  laid  aside,  and  there  be  excited  in  the  heart  the 
holy  desire  for  that  wisdom  'which  is  from  above.'  In  this 
way  the  intelligence,  which  is  once  admitted  to  these  Sacred 
studies,  and  thereby  illuminated  and  strengthened,  will 
acquire  a  marvellous  facility  in  detecting  and  avoiding  the 
fallacies  of  human  science,  and  in  gathering  and  using  for 
eternal  salvation  all  that  is  valuable  and  precious;  whilst, 
at  the  same  time,  the  heart  will  grow  warm,  and  will  strive, 
with  ardent  longing,  to  advance  in  virtue  and  in  Divine 
love.  'Blessed  are  they  who  examine  His  testimonies; 
they  shall  seek  Him  with  their  whole  heart. '     [Ps.  XVni. , 2]. 

"And  now,  filled  with  hope  in  the  Divine  assistance,  and 
trusting  to  your  pastoral  solicitude — as  a  pledge  of  heavenly 
grace,  and  a  sign  of  Our  special  good  will — to  you  all,  and 
to  the  Clergy,  and  to  the  whole  flock  entrusted  to  you.  We 
lovingly  impart  in  Our  Lord  the  Apostolic  Benediction. 

"Given  at  St.  Peter's,  at  Rome,  the  i8th  day  of  Novem- 
ber, 1893,  the  eighteenth  year  of  Our  Pontificate." 

POPE  LEO  XUL 

In  common  parlance,  revelation  and  inspiration  are  con- 
vertible terms,  but,  in  reality,  they  differ  greatly.  Revela- 
tion, from  revelare,  means  to  uncover,  unveil,  disclose  to  the 
view  something  hidden,  and,  in  the  present  instance,  to 
make  known  to  the  mind  a  concept  not  before  known.  This 
took  place  with  the  Prophets,  and  in  every  portion  of  the 
Holy  Writings  where  the  truths  enunciated  were  impervious 
to  the  human  understanding,  or  depended  on  the  free  w^ill  of 
God ;  in  fact,  wherever  the  idea  portrayed  was  not  acquired 
by  the  industry  and  labor  of  the  writer.  When,  therefore, 
the  writer  expresses  truths  which  he  had  acquired  by  the 


70  REVELATION   AND   INSPIRATION 

ordinary  .method  of  human  research  and  observation,  there 
is  no  revelation  from  God  requisite  or  given.  Thus  St.  Luke 
tells  us  that,  ''it  had  seemed  good  to  him,  who  had  followed 
studiously  all  things  from  the  beginning,  to  write  in  order 
these  things. "  Thus  the  author  of  the  II.  Book  of  Macca- 
bees testifies,  Cap.  II.  24 — 27:  **And  thus  the  things  that 
were  comprised  by  Jason  the  Cyrenean  in  five  volumes,  we 
have  attempted  to  compendiate  in  one  volume.  We  who 
have  undertaken  to  compendiate  this  work,  have  taken 
upon  ourselves  a  task  abounding  in  vigils  and  sweat. "  This 
book  then  is  not,  properly  speaking,  revealed.  But  usage 
has  prevailed  and  prevails  to  speak  of  the  whole  body  of  the 
Scriptures  as  revealed  writings,  and  we  do  not  wish  to  cor- 
rect this  usage,  but  only  to  define  and  fix  our  terms  for  the 
greater  facility  of  our  treatise.  Inspiration  then  pervades 
the  whole  structure  of  Scripture:  it  is  its  formal  principle, 
its  soul ;  revelation  is  only  called  in,  as  we  have  said,  where 
the  writer  could  not,  or,  de  facto,  did  not  acquire  his  know- 
ledge in  the  ordinary  manner. 

This  distinction  is  of  great  moment,  as  many  difficulties 
are  solved  by  the  same.  The  neglect  of  this  distinction  gave 
rise  to  a  censure  of  one  of  the  propositions  of  the  famous 
Leon  Lessius,  which,  had  it  been  couched  in  precise  terms, 
would  have  challenged  contradiction.  The  Holy  Ghost, 
then,  is  the  directing  and  impelling  agent  in  all  the  Scripture, 
but  not  in  the  same  manner.  He  discloses  the  truths  un- 
known before  in  revelation ;  he  impels  to  write  infallibly  the 
things  which  God  would  communicate  to  man  in  inspiration. 
We  have  defined  above  the  concept  of  inspiration ;  we  shall 
now  scrutinize  more  closely  its  object  and  extent.  The 
Vatican  Council  has  given  us  a  definition  which  will  serve 
as  our  guide  in  dealing  with  the  present  subject,  for,  as  we 
have  proven  above,  the  Church  can  be  the  only  guide  in  such 
a  question. 

In  Cap.  II.  De  Revel,  we  find: 

**  Qui  quidem  veteris  et  novi  Testamenti  libri  integri  cum 
omnibus  suis  partibus,  prout  in  ejusdem  Concilii  decreto 
recensentur,  et  in  veteri  vulgata  latina  editione  habentur, 
pro  sacris  et  canonicis  suscipiendi  sunt.     Eos  vero  Ecclesia 


REVELATION   AND    INSPIRATION  71 

pro  sacris  et  canonicis  habet,  non  ideo  quod  sola  humana 
industria  concinnati,  sua  deinde  auctoritate  sint  approbati; 
nee  ideo  dumtaxat,  quod  revelationem  sine  errore  contineant, 
sed  propterea  quod  Spiritu  Sancto  inspirante  conscripti 
Deum  habent  auctorem,  atque  ut  tales  ipsi  Ecclesiae  traditi 
sunt."     And  in  Canon  IV.  De  Revelatione: 

"Si  quis  sacr^  Scripturas  libros  integros  cum  omnibus 
suis  partibus,  prout  illos  sancta  Tridentina  Synodus  recen- 
suit,  pro  sacris  et  canonicis  non  susceperit,  aut  eos  divinitus 
inspiratos  esse  negaverit ;  anathema  sit.  " 

Hence  it  is  of  faith  that  God  is  the  Author  of  the  Sacred 
Scriptures,  and  of  the  integral  hooks  with  all  their  parts.  It 
is  not  here  asserted  that  God  with  his  own  hand  wrote  the 
books  materially,  but  that  he  is  the  Auctor  principalis  per 
conscriptores  suos.  Now,  we  shall  bear  in  mind  the  relation 
of  the  author  to  his  work,  in  weighing  and  judging  of  the 
correctness  or  falseness  of  opinions  which  deal  with  this 
subject. 

Inspirare  is  the  Latin  equivalent  for  the  Greek  deoirveveiv^ 
which  word  S.  Paul  uses  in  his  II.  Epist.  to  Tim.  III.,  i6., 
'*7rd(Ta  >ypa<l)r)  OeoirvevaTo^**.  It  signifies  that  one  is  im- 
pelled by  God,  that  the  Spirit  of  God  is  in  him,  moving  him 
to  action  and  guiding  him  in  that  action.  Hence,  God  is  the 
principal  author,  the  principal  cause ;  and  the  inspired  agent 
in  the  instrumental  cause. 

In  every  action  wrought  by  a  creature,  there  is  a  concur- 
sus  of  two  causes,  the  causa  prima,  and  the  causa  secunda ; 
the  Creator  and  the  Creature.  We  exist  by  reflected  exis- 
tence, as  the  moon  shines  by  reflected  light.  The  same  act, 
which  brought  us  into  being  at  our  creation,  preserves  us  in 
that  being,  and  this  is  what  is  called  the  conservatio  in  esse ; 
and  the  conservative  act  is  all  that  prevents  us  from  relaps- 
ing into  the  primal  absolute  chaos.  God  must  then  co- 
operate with  his  creature  in  every  act,  for  the  second  cause 
must  depend  on  the  First  Cause  essentially,  and,  therefore, 
in  every  act,  it  must  be  upheld  by  the  conservative  power 
of  God. 

But  there  are  certain  acts  where  this  concursus  is  more 
marked  and  potent  on  the  part  of  the  Creator,  and  Inspira- 
tion is  one  of  these  acts. 


72  CARD.    MANNING 

On  this  theme  Cardinal  Manning  (Temporal  Mission  of 
the  Holy  Ghost,  pp.  158 — 161^  writes  as  follows: 

In  order  to  appreciate  more  exactly  the  reach  of  these 
opinions,  it  will  be  well  to  examine  them  somewhat  more 
intimately,  and  to  fix  the  sense  of  the  terms  used  in  the 
discussion  of  the  subject. 

(i.)  First,  then,  comes  the  word  Inspiration,  which  is 
often  confounded  with  Revelation. 

Inspiration,  in  its  first  intention,  signifies  the  action  of  the 
Divine  Spirit  upon  the  human,  that  is,  upon  the  intelligence 
and  upon  the  will.  It  is  an  intelligent  and  vital  action  of 
God  upon  the  soul  of  man;  and  "inspired"  is  to  be  predi- 
cated, not  of  books  or  truths,  but  of  living  agents. 

In  its  second  intention,  it  signifies  the  action  of  the  Spirit 
of  God  upon  the  intelligence  and  will  of  man,  whereby  any 
one  is  impelled  and  enabled  to  act,  or  to  speak,  or  to  write, 
in  some  special  way  designed  by  the  Spirit  of  God. 

In  its  still  more  special  and  technical  intention,  it  signifies 
an  action  of  the  Spirit  upon  men,  impelling  them  to  write 
what  God  reveals,  suggests,  or  wills  that  they  should  write. 
But  inspiration  does  not  necessarily  signify  revelation,  or 
suggestion  of  the  matter  to  be  written. 

(2.)  Secondly,  Revelation  signifies  the  unfolding  to  the 
intelligence  of  man  truths  which  are  contained  in  the  intelli- 
gence of  God,  the  knowledge  of  which  without  such  revela- 
tion would  be  impossible.  Men  may  be  the  subjects  of 
revelation,  and  not  of  inspiration ;  and  they  might  be  the 
subjects  of  inspiration,  and  not  of  revelation. 

(3.)  Thirdly,  Suggestion,  in  the  theory  of  inspiration, 
signifies  the  bringing  to  mind  such  things  as  God  wills  the 
writer  to  put  in  writing.  All  revelation  is  suggestion,  but 
not  all  suggestion  revelation ;  because  much  that  is  suggested 
may  be  of  the  natural  order,  needing  no  revelation,  being 
already  known  by  natural  reason,  or  by  historical  tradition 
and  the  like. 

(4.)  Fourthly,  by  Assistance  is  understood  the  presence 
and  help  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  by  which  the  human  agent,  in 
full  use  of  his  own  liberty  and  powers — such  as  natural  gifts, 
genius,  acquired  cultivation,  and  the  like — executes  the  work 
which  the  Divine  Inspiration  impels  him  to  write. 


CARD.   MANNING  73 

There  are  three  kinds  of  assistance. 

(i.)  First,  there  is  the  assistance  afforded  by  the  Holy 
Spirit  to  all  the  faithful,  by  which  their  intelligence  is  illumin- 
ated and  their  will  strengthened,  without  exempting  them 
from  the  liability  to  error. 

(2.)  Secondly,  there  is  the  assistance  vouchsafed  to  the 
Church  diffused  throughout  the  worlci  or  congregated  in 
council,  or  to  the  person  of  the  Vicar  of  Jesus  Christ,  speaking 
ex  cathedra,  which  excludes  all  liability  to  error  within  the 
sphere  of  faith  and  morals,  and  such  facts  and  truths  as 
attach  to  them  (of  which  relations  the  Church  is  the  ultimate 
judge),  but  does  not  extend  to  the  other  orders  of  purely 
natural  science  and  knowledge. 

(3.)  Lastly,  there  is  the  assistance  granted  as  a  'gratia 
gratis  data'  to  the  inspired  writers  of  the  Holy  Scripture 
which  excludes  all  liability  to  error  in  the  act  of  writing  not 
only  in  matters  of  faith  and  morals,  but  in  all  matter,  of 
whatsoever  kind,  which  by  the  inspiration  of  God  they  are 
impelled  to  write. 

The  Jesuits,  in  the  '  Theologia  Wirceburgensis, '  sum  up 
the  subject  in  the  following  way : — The  authorship  of  God 
*  may  be  conceived  in  three  ways.  First,  by  special  assist- 
ance, which  preserves  the  writer  from  all  error  and  falsehood. 
Secondly,  by  inspiration,  which  impels  the  writer  to  the  act 
of  writing,  without,  however,  destroying  his  liberty.  Third- 
ly, by  revelation,  by  which  truths  hitherto  unknown  are 
manifested. '  They  then  affirm,  '  that  God  specially  in- 
spired the  sacred  writers  with  the  truths  and  matter  ex- 
pressed in  the  sacred  books. " 

Perhaps  it  may  be  more  in  accordance  with  the  facts  of 
the  case  to  invert  the  order,  and  to  say  that  what  we  call 
Inspiration,  in  the  special  and  technical  sense,  includes  the 
three  following  operations  of  the  Holy  Ghost  upon  the  mind 
of  the  sacred  writers : — 

(i.)  First,  the  impulse  to  put  into  writing  the  matter 
which  God  wills  they  should  record. 

(2.)  Secondly,  the  suggestion  of  the  matter  to  be  written, 
whether  by  revelation  of  truths  not  previously  known,  or 


74  GOD   THE   AUTHOR 

only  by  prompting  of  those  things  which  were  already  with- 
in the  writer's  knowledge. 

(3.)  Thirdly,  the  assistance  which  excludes  liability  to 
error  in  writing  all  things,  whatsoever  may  be  suggested 
to  them  by  the  Spirit  of  God  to  be  written. 

From  this  follow  two  corollaries : — 

1 .  That  in  the  Holy  Scripture  there  can  be  no  falsehood 
or  error. 

2.  That  God  is  the  author  of  all  inspired  books." 

It  is  declared  in  the  definition  of  the  Vatican  Council  that 
God  is  the  Author  of  the  books  of  the  Old  and  New  Testa- 
ments with  all  their  parts.  We  also  assert  that  the  various 
inspired  writers  were  authors  of  the  respective  books  which 
history  and  tradition  attribute  to  them.  Therefore,  there 
is  a  concursus  of  two  causes  here,  of  two  authors.  A  book 
may  be  defined  to  be  a  ''Contextus  sententiarum  seu  sen- 
suum  scripto  consignatus. "  We  here  denominate  book, 
every  complete  component  factor  of  the  Old  or  New  Testa- 
ment, even  though  it  consist  of  but  a  few  sentences,  as  for 
instance  the  Epistle  to  Philemon,  consisting  of  but  25  verses, 
comprised  in  one  chapter.  In  every  book  or  writing,  there  are 
two  elements,  the  material  and  the  formal  element.  The 
formal  element  comprises  the  'Xomplexus"  of  ideas  and 
judgments  signified  by  the  words  and  propositions  in  the 
book.  These  by  some  are  called  the  "res  et  sententise"; 
by  others,  the  "sensa";  by  Franzelin,  the  "Veritates. " 
The  material  element  of  the  book,  ''in  fieri/'  is  the  con- 
signing of  these  veritates  to  writing.  The  author  of  a  book 
needs  not  necessarily  consign  the  veritates  to  writing.  St. 
Paul  employed  an  amanuensis  to  commit  his  teachings  to 
writing  in  his  Epistles,  and,  yet,  he  is  their  author.  It  is 
the  creations  of  the  soul  reflected  in  a  work  that  denominate 
an  agent  an  author.  Any  hand  may  do  the  material  work, 
but  the  mind  back  of  the  truths  is  the  factor  to  which  is 
rightly  attributable  the  authorship. 

When  we,  therefore,  assert  for  God  the  authorship  of  the 
Scriptures,  we  do  not  mean  to  say  that  he  consigned  the 
ideas  to  writing  with  his  own  hand,  but  that  he  was  the 
formal  cause  of  the  *'res  et  sententias, "  of  the  "sensa,"  of 


GOD   THE   AUTHOR  75 

the  ''  veritates.  "  Now  the  relation  of  an  author  to  his  work 
is  to  be  measured  by  the  object  of  the  work.  In  a  rhetorical 
or  poetical  work,  the  words  and  style  would  be  "  per  se 
intenta, "  and,  consequently,  the  work  could  not  be  called 
the  creation  of  any  certain  author,  unless  he  had  per  se 
produced  such  beauty  of  diction.  But  in  a  book  whose 
scope  is  to  convey  truth  to  the  mind,  and  naught  else, 
the  style  or  the  selection  of  the  words  would  not  necessarily 
need  be  the  effect  of  the  principal  author.  Provided  they 
be  adequate  and  fitting  to  convey  the  truths  which  he  might 
wish  to  impart,  the  book  can  attain  its  end,  even  though 
the  principal  cause  have  no  special  influence  in  the  selection 
of  words  or  the  style.  Now,  it  is  evident  that  no  being  can 
be  termed  the  author  of  a  book,  unless  he  produces  the  for- 
mal element  of  the  book.  God  is  the  Author  of  all  the  books 
of  Scripture,  and,  therefore,  he  produced  all  the  "  veritates, " 
or  '*res  et  sententiae"  therein  contained.  These  are  true 
and  inspired ;  the  other  part  may  be  defective.  God  pro- 
duced these  ''res  et  sententiag"  either  by  revelation  or  by 
inspiration;  by  revelation,  if  the  truths  were  impervious 
to  human  reason,  such  as  futura  contingentia,  mysteries, 
or  any  other  truth  which  the  writer  could  not  acquire  by 
natural  means ;  by  inspiration  always,  illumining  the  mind 
and  moving  the  will  to  write  all  those  things  and  only  those 
things  which  God  wished  to  communicate  to  his  creature, 
whether  those  things  were  then  for  the  first  time  known  by 
revelation,  or  were  the  acquisitions  of  human  industry  and 
observation.  For  even  in  this  latter  case,  the  special  action 
of  God  is  necessary  to  impel  the  writer  to  write  all  and  only 
the  things  which  God  wishes  written,  and  to  write  them 
infallibly,  without  the  mixture  of  error. 

We  see  thus  that  there  is  always  a  greater  concursus  than 
the  concursus  generalis  in  inspiration.  God  does  for  the 
inspired  writer  more  than  "conservare  in  esse."  He  is  the 
impelling  power  within  him.  Sometimes,  as  was  the  case 
with  the  Prophets,  the  second  agent  is  thrown  into  an 
ecstacy,  and  his  mind  is  imbued  with  ideas,  in  the  creation  of 
which  he  is  only  the  passive  agent.  Though  the  inspired 
writer  is  always  t'Tro  Tlvev/JLarof;  'Aylov  (j>ep6/jL€vo^,  borne  on, 


76  CHAUVIN 

impelled  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  not  always  is  this  impelling 
force  active  in  the  same  way.  It  is  different  in  prophecy 
than  it  is  in  the  inspiration  which  guided  the  Evangelists  in 
infallibly  committing  to  writing  things  to  which  they  had 
been  eye-witnesses.  Inspiration  does  not  preclude  the 
examining  of  existing  documents,  the  patient  toil  and  re- 
search which  always  accompany  the  natural  acquisition  of 
knowledge.  Moses  may  have  made  use  of  existing  docu- 
ments, when  giving  an  account  of  Creation.  But  the  cer- 
tainty of  inspiration  is  not  measured  by  the  certainty  of 
these  existing  documents,  nor  by  the  certainty  of  fallible 
htmian  observation  and  research.  Always  the  hand  of  God 
is  there,  guiding,  and  positively  influencing  the  agent 
to  write  all  those  things,  and  only  those  things  which  God 
would  have  written;  and  this  assistance  is  not  merely  a 
negative  one,  but  a  positive  act  exercised  in  every  concept 
of  Holy  Writ.  Such  is  the  relation  of  an  author  to  his  work, 
and  we  know  by  divine  faith  that  God  is  the  Author  of  the 
Holy  Scriptures. 

It  may  not  be  amiss  here  to  indicate  some  of  the  principal 
writers  on  this  theme  in  our  times :  Franzelin  (De  Divina 
Traditione  et  vScriptura,  Romae  1882) :  Ubaldi  (Introductio 
in  Sac.  Script.  Romae  1888):  Schmid  (De  Inspirat.  Bibl. 
Vi  et  Ratione,  Brixinae  1885) ;  Crets  (De  Divina  Bibliorum 
Inspiratione  Lovanii  1886);  Holzhey  (Die  Inspiration  der 
Heil.  Schrift,  Miinchen  1895);  Zanecchia  (Divina  Inspirat. 
etc.  Romae  1899,  Revised  1903) ;  Chauvin  (L' Inspiration 
des  Divines  Ecritures,  Paris  1896) ;  Billot  (De  Inspirat.  Sac. 
Script.  Romae  1903) ;  Pesch  (De  Inspirat.  Sacrae  Script. 
Friburgi  1906). 

Of  the  Abba's  Chauvin's  work,  the  Dublin  Review  (1897 
pp.  215 — 218)  has  the  following  favorable  review: 

''Although  inspiration  is  very  frequently  spoken  of,  yet, 
like  progress,  civilisation  and  liberty,  it  is  rarely  undersood. 
The  vast  majority  of  those  who  refer  to  it  do,  no  doubt,  in- 
tend to  suggest  some  kind  of  mysterious  influence  from  on 
high ;  but  their  ideas  are  vague  and  indefinite.  They  think 
of  it  as  of  a  dark  figure,  veiled  and  hooded,  that  moves  in 
silence  and  never  reveals  its  features. 


CHAUVIN  77 

''All  will  readily  admit  that  inspiration  necessarily  im- 
plies a  divine  influence.  But  divine  influences  are  many; 
and  it  is  a  task  of  unusual  delicacy  to  define  that  specific  in- 
fluence which  constitutes  inspiration.  There  is  a  divine  in- 
fluence which  actively  pervades  all  creation  and  rules  mighty 
from  end  to  end;  but  it  is  not  inspiration.  We  call  it 
law  and  providence.  Another  kind  of  influence  enriches  man 
with  virtue,  and  blossoms  out  into  holiness  of  life;  but  we 
name  it  grace,  not  inspiration.  Even  when  inspirations  of 
grace  are  mentioned  by  theologians,  the  word  has  not  the 
same  meaning  that  it  bears  when  we  speak  of  the  inspiration 
of  Scripture ;  for  when  a  man  has  been  inspired  to  write,  we 
say :  'God  speaks  thus,'  but  when  a  man  under  the  influence 
of  grace  makes  an  act  of  faith  in  the  Creed,  we  do  not  say : 
'God  beheves  thus.'  God  is  personally  identified  with  in- 
spiration in  a  manner  very  different  from  that  by  which  He 
is  identified  with  the  works  of  grace  in  general.  Lastly,  it 
is  only  by  a  divine  influence  that  the  Church  is  preserved 
from  error  in  all  her  solemn  definitions  of  faith  and  morals. 
But  here  again,  this  influence  is  not  termed  inspiration,  but 
merely  assistance.  Ecclesiastical  definitions,  although  in- 
fallible, are  not  inspired. 

"What,  then,  is  inspiration?  What  are  our  means  for 
detecting  its  presence  in  this  or  that  particular  instance? 
Before  we  can  venture  to  answer  these  questions  we  must 
first  determine  what  are  the  reliable  sources  of  information 
on  the  subject;  but  it  is  precisely  in  this  preliminary  work 
of  determination  that  discordant  voices  are  making  them- 
selves most  loudly  heard.  One  company  of  explorers  is  con- 
tent to  accept,  on  the  general  consent  of  Christians,  the 
abridged  Bible  of  protestant  tradition  as  being  truly  inspired. 
Starting  with  this  assured  fact,  the  discovery  of  what  is 
meant  by  inspiration  is  merely  a  matter  of  induction  from 
Biblical  phenomena.  The  chief  merit  claimed  for  the  system 
is  that  it  makes  the  doctrine  of  Biblical  inspiration  abso- 
lutely secure  against  every  form  of  literary  and  scientific 
analysis.  He  who  believes  in  the  inspiration  of  Scripture 
may,  with  unruffled  serenity,  admit  the  presence  in  the  Bible 
of  flagrant  contradictions,  or  gross  historical  errors,  and  of 


78  CHAUVIN 

a  low  moral  tone ;  for,  since  the  Bible  is  inspired,  the  more 
clearly  we  understand  what  the  Bible  actually  is,  the  deeper 
will  be  our  insight  into  the  nature  of  inspiration  itself.  So 
far  removed,  then,  are  the  results  of  analysis  from  being 
opposed  to  the  doctrine  of  inspiration,  that  they  are  an 
essential  factor  in  its  due  apprehension. 

"Another  company  of  searchers  after  inspiration  have 
been  endowed  by  a  merciful  heaven  with,  or  have  created 
for  themselves,  an  a  priori  and  quite  subjective  idea  of  the 
true  nature  of  inspiration.  This  idea  they  employ  as  a  sort 
of  search-light  which  they  steadily  flash  around,  and  are 
then  able  to  inform  us  of  the  varying  degrees  of  purity  in 
which  inspiration  may  be  found,  not  only  in  the  several 
books  of  Scripture,  but  also  in  the  literature  of  the  world  at 
large.  Unfortunately,  the  initial  idea  of  inspiration  is  not 
uniform,  and  the  results  of  its  application  are  consequently 
divergent.  In  general,  however,  it  seems  to  be  taken  for 
something  freshly  informing,  deeply  suggestive,  and  highly 
stimulating.  The  inspired  writer  is  the  man  with  a  special 
message  to  the  world.  Hence  those  solemn  disquisitions  on 
the  inspiration  of  our  modem  prophets,  Browning,  Tennyson 
Ruskin,  and  Carlyle. 

*To  readers  desirous  either  of  refreshing  their  memory, 
or  of  acquiring  clear  ideas  on  this  subject,  we  heartily  recom- 
mend the  Abbe  Chauvin's  little  book.  Judged  for  what  it 
professes  to  be — an  'essai  theologique  et  critique' — it  de- 
serv^es  all  praise.  Brief  as  it  is,  it  leaves  nothing  to  be 
desired  on  the  score  of  clearness ;  in  dealing  with  the  central 
points  of  the  doctrine  it  is  fuller,  and  certainly  more  able, 
than  many  volumes  far  more  pretentious.  With  acute  mind 
and  independent  judgment  the  author  has  availed  himself 
of  the  previous  labors  of  Schmid,  Crets,  d'Hulst,  Loisy, 
Didiot,  Brucker,  Brandi,  Holzhey,  and  others.  He  has  thus 
laid  under  contribution  the  most  recent  commentaries  and 
magazine  articles  on  the  encyclical  Providentissimus  Deus. 

"The  essay  is  divided  into  eight  chapters,  as  follows: 
The  idea  of  inspiration ;  its  psychology ;  false  theories  bearing 
upon  it;  true  and  false  tests  of  inspiration;  the  proof  of 
Scriptural  inspiration ;  the  subject  matter  of  inspiration;  the 


CHAUVIN  79. 

controversy  on  verbal  inspiration ;  the  consequences  of  ple- 
nary inspiration.  Of  these  chapters,  that  on  the  psychology 
of  inspiration  is  undoubtedly  the  most  important  and  the 
best.  We  are  so  interested  in  the  essay  that,  even  at  the 
risk  of  spoiling  what  the  author  has  done  so  well,  we  shall 
venture  on  a  brief  account  of  this  main  position. 

''Inspiration  implies  a  divine  breath  or  movement  by 
which  a  man  is  stirred  to  write  what  God  wishes  to  be  written. 
That  movement  plays  along  man's  intellect,  imagination, 
memory,  and  will,  till  man  becomes  the  responsive  instru- 
ment of  the  divine  purpose.  But  man  is  a  living  instrument, 
and  is  moved  by  God  in  accordance  with  his  free  and  living 
nature,  freely  and  deliberately — often  with  much  painful 
effort — to  the  desired  goal.  Hence  the  mental  gifts,  the 
literary  talents  and  characteristic  qualities  of  each  inspired 
writer  are  employed,  not  destroyed,  by  God.  St.  Thomas's 
principle  here  also  stands  good :  'Motus  primi  moventis  non 
recipitur  uniformiter  in  omnibus  .  .  .  sed  in  unoquoque 
secundum  proprium  modum.'  We  have  not  space  to  follow 
the  author  in  his  patient  analysis  of  the  divine  action  on 
man's  several  faculties,  but  he  leads  us  to  the  clear  conclu- 
sion that,  when  God  inspired  the  Scriptures  He  supematu- 
rally,  and  as  a  principal  cause,  employed  the  faculties  of  the 
inspired  writer,  as  His  instruments  in  the  psychological  labor 
which  man  would  have  undergone  if  he  had  been  writing  in 
his  own  name  instead  of  writing  in  the  name  of  God.  If 
writing  for  himself,  the  man  would  have  had  the  same  labor, 
but  he  would  not  have  had  the  same  divine  impulse  and 
guidance,  the  same  divine  assistance,  the  same  divine  illum- 
ination in  the  doing  of  his  task.  The  whole  result  belongs, 
not  partly  to  God  and  partly  to  man,  but  in  its  entirety  to 
God  and  in  its  entirety  to  man.  The  effect,  as  a  whole,  pro- 
ceeds from  both  God  and  man;  from  God  as  the  chief  cause, 
from  man  as  the  free  and  living  instrumental  cause.  'Effectus 
tot  us  attribuitur  instrumento,  et  principali  agenti  etiam 
totus  .  .  .  sed  totus  ab  utroque  secundum  alium 
modum.' 

**0n  the  principles  of  sound  psychology  not  only  does  that 
mechanical  speaking-tube  theory,  introduced  by  the  Reform 


80  METHOD   OF    INQUIRY 

Churches,  appear  in  all  its  grotesqueness  and  its  inconsist- 
ency with  the  plainest  facts,  but  also  does  the  theory  of 
some  Catholic  theologians  who  distinguish  between  Verba' 
and  'res  et  sententias'  show  itself  to  be  most  unnatural. 
Inspiration  covers  everything  the  inspired  writer  whites — 
thoughts,  opinions,  judgments,  surmises,  the  collection  and 
arrangement  of  materials,  method  of  treatment,  style  and 
language.  An  inspired  book  is  a  living  whole ;  and  the  whole 
is    inspired." 

Pesch's  work  merits  still  more  approbation. 

It  has  been  said  by  eminent  scholars  that  the  Catholic 
doctrine  on  inspiration  is  summed  up  in  the  one  sentence, 
authoritively  defined  by  the  Church :  "  God  is  the  author  of 
the  Holy  Scriptures. "  Certain  it  is  that  all  that  is  deter- 
mined by  the  Church  on  this  theme  is  drawn  from  that  sure 
principle.  The  Church  has  made  a  few  applications  of  the 
principle,  but  has  left  a  very  large  field  open.  In  entering 
this  field  every  writer  must  recognize  that  however  much 
he  may  differ  from  advocates  of  views  differing  from  his  own, 
he  is  bound  to  refrain  from  branding  with  any  note  of  in- 
famy opinions  which  the  Church  has  not  yet  condemned. 
In  all  ages  of  the  Church  good  men  have  been  material  here- 
tics :  and  on  the  other  hand  the  odium  theologicum  of  those 
who  had  a  "  zeal  for  God,  but  not  according  to  knowledge" 
CRom.  X.  2)  has  injured  the  very  cause  which  they  wished 
to  defend.  It  is  only  by  toleration  and  patient  examina- 
tion of  the  views  of  all  that  we  can  advance  our  knowledge 
of  these  deep  problems.  No  right-minded,  candid  seeker 
after  truth  will  object  to  arguments  against  his  opinions, 
but  personalities  wound  the  opponent,  without  promoting 
their  author's  side.  If  passion  could  be  set  aside,  it  would 
be  greatly  beneficial  to  scriptural  science  if,  of  the  sincere 
scholars  of  the  Church,  there  were  a  conference  regarding 
the  different  views  on  Inspiration,  that  all  the  argu- 
ments pro  and  con  might  be  weighed  dispassionately,  and 
the  best  adopted. 

Of  course  that  which  we  here  state  only  applies  to  candid, 
sincere  seekers  after  truth.  There  are  in  the  Church  certain 
sycophants  who  angle  for  popularity  by  copying  the  German 


3LiS 


PROTEsmmn  'ehedry  SB 

^^!ifcplX^SP#PF'I*iino\wo'^  oUu  h':>-^-^o\  ad  l8um  lie^ft  sldia 
Prof.   Dods  in  his  lecture  on   Inspiration  degj^y^^^^l^ 

•  DHoriiTBD  rhirh/  m  bhh  ad  1  i^ds  ^'lo'\^T^di  saa  oYJ 
not  gone  to  it  with  a  preconceived  theoi-y  of  whj^t^.ij  f^^$i 

m^Jc|l^c^.^yha,tis  j^yiga^ 

orinafacjifax^i.e^j^the^eji^^^^  ^^p^^t^ 

"in  Professor  Bowne's  small  but  excellent  SoQk.p|j)tl^ 

inspiration  isd^ceBnibpJip.tte  pJ9.4upt.r^^^4;liejm^^gi|^  ^^^ 
nieasure,,Qldnsgiratip|ij.  j^^i^i^qt-be  .decidefit,b)^)^b,^^'¥^^'  ^^- 
flectioii^  ^ut^^Pfily,  byj-^^,putcome,  Wh^^r  inj^gjrp^^ia^ 
mu^^  bejegrnejdlriQm,^^^  it  does.  rW^p[^^st  n,(jt^c^t,enpf^ 
the  chaf  af^tef-jpf  ^life^  l^ok^ ;  f rprn .th,e, ,jns,piT§ii<^n p^  ;^jUt^  ^'^^ 
rathe^;4e%{jin^  ^^,^^^\^lf^^^^ 

^S^Ma  iWmH-m^^^odi  b^orirjorrriB Iuib  'u^  rliod qhoIb  spsiIT 
,,. ;, "  g^e^pblgfiy^rjf  eg^d.  ta 

^e,  Diyjine^  an^  t5br?)[^ti;iyaaa3r^a9tQ^^ 

wj]jk:j^^  h^verbg^p  j^i^yfv^^^^d^h^i.  |^^^^fr/i|;^-.or^9f^i^pi^g 

PTf^P^?iJ^fflrft^£^ri1^^.f^f.^-^^  doimi  V19V 

pf  rth$f)r^j^tioiI[of  .i|}^rpfe§e}i6ti^^  ;:fi)^ff^fe3tQ7^3^  (ati^T5?h;^ 
teachingit  fy,:^  ^p^^^^0Ah^MM^m^h^  pniy:.ii^pa{?4.^(^k 
in:  the.  ^vprld ;  rifeSMw^ct^feiat ,-  it[  i^  iiaapfO^sible  j«C;'^P*^^'^'<-^  ^St  Ar 
lish -^  :p^iif e^|r^j(^^^^^  ^j^hfelif '3^-^11/ eI]ftfea^e:^ay^r3l,pr^p§$i^^ 

ptt^pnc^Btfei^ f^  wb^tvi^f^,  b'd^i^  QtmreJUf pf  .fe^',;  tQf\^h<fc>m 


52  THE    FATHERS 

Bible  is  a  book  of  God's  authorship,  that  it  is  the  word  of 
God,  and  every  theory  based  upon  an  examination  of  the 
Bible  itself  must  be  forced  into  conformity  with  this  infallible 
definition. 

We  see  therefore  that  the  field  in  which  Catholic  theolo- 
gians may  differ  is  in  applying  the  principles  which  the 
Church  has  defined  to  the  specific  statements  of  the  Bible ; 
and  here  it  must  be  granted  that  the  divergency  of  opinion 
is  very  great. 

Many  of  the  difficulties  which  science  and  the  investiga- 
tions of  criticism  have  brought  up  were  unknown  to  the 
Fathers,  and  we  find  in  them  an  unquestioning  acceptance 
of  the  Scriptures  as  the  word  of  God.  Clement  of  Rome 
declares :  "Ye  have  searched  the  Scriptures,  which  are  true, 
which  were  given  through  the  Holy  Ghost;  and  Ye  know 
that  nothing  unrighteous  or  counterfeit  is  written  in  them" 
(I.  Cor.  45)- 

Justin  the  Martyr  in  his  Dialogue  with  Trypho,  Chap. 
VII.  clearly  asserts  the  inspiration  of  the  Holy  Books : 

"  There  existed,  long  before  this  time,  certain  men  more 
ancient  than  all  those  who  are  esteemed  philosophers,  both 
righteous  and  beloved  by  God,  who  spoke  by  the  Divine 
Spirit,  and  foretold  events  which  would  take  place,  and 
which  are  now  taking  place.  They  are  called  prophets. 
These  alone  both  saw  and  announced  the  truth  to  men,  neither 
reverencing  nor  fearing  any  man,  not  influenced  by  a  desire 
for  glory,  but  speaking  those  things  alone  which  they  saw 
and  which  they  heard,  being  filled  with  the  Holy  Spirit. 
Their  writings  are  still  extant,  and  he  who  has  read  them  is 
very  much  helped  in  his  knowledge  of  the  beginning  and  end 
of  things,  and  of  those  matters  which  the  philosopher  ought 
to  know,  provided  he  has  believed  them.  For  they  did  not 
use  demonstration  in  their  treatises,  seeing  that  they  were 
witnesses  to  the  truth  above  all  demonstration,  and  worthy 
of  belief ;  and  those  events  which  have  happened,  and  those 
which  are  happening,  compel  you  to  assent  to  the  utterances 
made  by  them,  although,  indeed,  they  were  entitled  to  credit 
on  account  of  the  miracles  which  they  performed,  since  they 
both  glorified  the  Creator,  the  God  and  Father  of  all  things, 


THE    FATHERS  83 

and  proclaimed  His  Son,  the  Christ  [sent]  by  Him:  which, 
indeed,  the  false  proj^hets,  who  are  filled  with  the  lying  un- 
clean spirit,  neither  have  done  nor  do,  but  venture  to  work 
certain  wonderful  deeds  for  the  purpose  of  astonishing  men, 
and  glorify  the  spirits  and  demons  of  error." 

Again  in  the  same  treatise  he  answers  Trypho : 

'*If  you  spoke  these  words,  Trypho,  and  then  kept  silence 
in  simplicity  and  with  no  ill  intent,  neither  repeating  what 
goes  before  nor  adding  what  comes  after,  you  must  be  for- 
given ;  but  if  [you  have  done  so]  because  you  imagined  that 
you  could  throw  doubt  on  the  passage,  in  order  that  I  might 
say  the  Scriptures  contradicted  each  other,  you  have  erred. 
But  I  shall  not  venture  to  suppose  or  to  say  such  a  thing ; 
and  if  a  Scripture  which  appears  to  be  of  such  a  kind  be 
brought  forward,  and  if  there  be  a  pretext  [for  saying]  that  it 
is  contrary  [to  some  other],  since  I  am  entirely  convinced 
that  no  Scripture  contradicts  another,  I  shall  admit  rather 
that  I  do  not  understand  what  is  recorded,  and  shall  strive 
to  persuade  those  who  imagine  that  the  Scriptures  are  con- 
tradictory, to  be  rather  of  the  same  opinion  as  myself." 

Athenagoras  applying  to  every  inspired  agent  the  name 
of  prophet  describes  their  inspiration  thus : 

''But  w^e  have  for  witnesses  of  the  things  we  apprehend 
and  believe,  prophets,  men  w^ho  have  pronounced  concerning 
God  and  the  things  of  God,  guided  by  the  Spirit  of  God.  And 
you  too  will  admit,  excelling  all  others  as  you  do  in  intel- 
ligence and  in  piety  towards  the  true  God  that  it  would  be 
irrational  for  us  to  cease  to  believe  in  the  Spirit  from  God, 
who  moved  the  mouths  of  the  prophets  like  musical  instru- 
ments, and  to  give  heed* to  mere  human  opinions."  (A  Plea 
for  Christians). 

Irenaeus  makes  the  Holy  Ghost  the  Author  of  the  Scrip- 
tures. In  n.  Against  Heresies,  XXVHI.  2,  he  thus  de- 
clares : 

**If,  however,  we  cannot  discover  explanations  of  all 
those  things  in  Scripture  which  are  made  the  subject  of  in- 
vestigation, yet  let  us  not  on  that  account  seek  after  any 
other  God  besides  Him  who  really  exists.  For  this  is  the 
very  greatest  impiety.    We  shotild  leave  things  of  that  nature 


m^j^c^^M^'^^fe^  M<«p«t^i4d^  tbispth^  Wba3i)of>1^(]jdmiid) 
His  Spirit,  are  on  tte«'5^rfe;^iae^Jtftiaii*tde^titj^t©^^ 
edge  of  His-M^t§3i^pv/^ft^3t3n^^4iiAarcKasiErItoiwb^  if 
tM§i4^^t@^^e>*lfeias^afiq^lJe^«r<tMi$gsri|)k5itt|3lrmTdiI^^ 
^lyf  £M^y^i(§11f 'fe^^^^ite  J^te  iHkd^r  kfitowif )tis  tist  bj^q&uelsH 
tib^,  ^^^ffla^{e??^iM8$ho^  tfeffogsgf^hie^toisttr.c^ri  ^er^ 
f^^e^tM^^J^tifefe^-^^^^j^Ol*^  telM©hv©YM{  wii|JH:\tB-hamEll€§ 
afM^^^^el  iM^a¥d>li$  dio^^.<5M^tJ^(^iWitfe>cfmtfeceMiit)teia3ow^ 

c^lfrfti^:^-^  ^-^'-''2  lo  3d  ot  a7£9qq£  rioirfv/  DiutqriD'S  b  ii  J^rrB 

(^fflsty^^  d'^s^'fiihfMf  %M^i^€.te#^  jf^^^  ^'limmm^e^ 
ss^m  fe^te  6&§f)ei:''^'^#y^iMa^te?6¥ai3M<^^^?^^^^^'#^^ 

StB^m^^cf^m^  4f;^^£m;piii  Bfe^ii^itesg  "^mmfe^Ai&i  to 

Moses,   so  also,   h^iM(^'d^mW¥/me'^mmr^'^  ^^ 
propm&Mrellk^^fd^^s^'mm^'p^  ^KukI  again, 

t¥e^^IIMl-Hi^iM¥  *€5?^RM¥^-A^^aM-^a§M^^^  •§8tMh6  km 

Mify  k  HaS,'Mess^  W^iiiHpMfi^eM  ^iSi  VevS^led^aha 
shown  to  "believers  by  one  and  the  same  God  through  th6 

i^Sf&^m  B,'^^i^(t^%M^  at 

aff6tM^  pr^ofini^fli^  la^f  2t^e^!fflg?4g^  fypro^^fx^ 
^.t  another. exhorting,  and  then  setting  free  His  servanf,^Sff3 
a!&)piiri^^6?i"i^'^£f  ^ot?TS^^^/^?a^^ 


i^Mm,^i^i dte^^|i:if  Jc^M' V^  46,  4^  oJJLum'mvjti'^U^-t P^eri, 


r^nd  increasb/iiaSi  the§&ii|^ija¥s§€i,y^:brLji«JEe^^^  xm^- 

tiply.'  "*  ".riEsbn:.;  s:  il  mrri  oJ  .nnslorm  af  ^i  a^irtrrlj  or{77  rnrrf 
.  ;   .Origen-i^iy^ry  ']&>^Wt;<//r§i$i9^aJrtb9MiJSH§?^ga^     ^^^ 
Mnatters  of  s)i^WirtiVOT^m^TSg>t  i^^ttisfie^^i^^ii^^^e  .^gipjn^^ 

we  take  in  addition,  for  the  'pl^f  f-pj^  ^U^cSJ^^tej^^^^s^  te^i^- 
fwjTici  i§^^jt<yj^d,:.ft^  N^w,:.,;a^^-enii^o^,J)3^j;?g|§;^^9  f^(|n- 

^m-'^rr  {M^X^^^m%oW^  Wiuh^ho?.  bstiqanr  vhnr/ib  sd^ 

,pth.&mrj;3:l  odi  mrrri  i)orni:oI  !}nrvi-;ri  baii  .a^idioT^f  srjTt  vd 
f::r:;  Cl^raaent  <3ilA'iQkaMM:M^i^m^^viUd^^3^:^^9^§i  ^ 
Holy  Scriptures:  '^lacouM  ^i<hmi^A^^j^'^f^m3(^f^M<^fk3i^^ 
:  Ql^wHieh  '<no^;3t^^ditll§c|sii4}l9f#^LW^3fv/t^^^ 
dulfiilMlfiofBtl?^o$>(^^1*b.^fc'i^b§nI^^n^H^ 
fSpoken^ttjhosc^iWng^jrqe  (^MSoiS^ti<9%-^ 

rr .  /  4gkin'm^tk€  Stroinn^ata^  ^Pi:9ifcQlerr[f|(j|r<I^Qj^m%:6A^A^^ 
cCordiTigl35Althba©f ^Bltoaoti]^s^.eiftifJ^i|C^.>^^  fefeYrf^r  Q^ 
•miii4hacrd^3lBa&^a'/jtosijte|lfeadfe  2lAS^ASti($ttS5l^Ilili64b§fflp- 
iture£''3n?Albl)M^,iHriiitingsiamjfedJ  trf>  r^v^f^li^^j  ^ltl|§oi^jF 
Scriptures  as  the  infalHble  ^f (:ydI$f/^S.  aurmonna  cTarrrBgA) 
&:j:irSpacejisIiu3±  affiordedifWllrhj^iJiuPiQyp^^riM^^e^  feq^  the 
-iKearks  qfeiSt..^BGisil/tn>l5s^tti^  te  d©Ojare§Tfcte;P$rij?|]^S)jt@  t>e 
adi^rineD  ^I[^tiQiiiiie/«hoilr^a|>sagfi$^TM^^^ 

^,'\^iii^s^rI:rMBi93tert4feiiiiQ0gIIOffe?i^ 

:  aagiBEirxea[diag:;3especiall>!-iQ§Ithpr:  Ne\t'3!gst5tien;^ab§p'g?Ljge 

,^e^  'fteqaaJerttlyimiaehMfc  Q@£a0Srpf(Tj$aiJtigi<tbe,5>Mt;  ,i^$li>e- 
':€M3e:i;yii^tjiS  wfjt,li6iv/is[ilaftr^flui,r  ktit,fb^c^,u^»&.§r#^in4?Wf 

?;b© injurious  (fed  JthensJckrlJiJiisti^^  aMiBcn^lm^iSiQc^i'^WP^ 


,fID£[n;l.s23.   4£Ma3WaX£*fe  £is3  .a.i  £;.  f     .di  .III  .miT  s  .^3  * 


86  THE    FATHERS 

and  profitable,*  and  there  is  nothing  in  it  unclean :  only  to 
him  who  thinks  it  is  unclean,  to  him  it  is  unclean." 

St.  Athanasius  to  Marcellinus  (Migne  27.  11)  speaks  thus 
of  Holy  Scripture:  "All  Scripture,  O  Son,  both  of  the 
Old  and  of  the  New  Testament  is  divinely  inspired  and  useful 
for  teaching,  as  it  is  written." 

In  his  Thirty-ninth  Letter  St.  Athanasius  appeals  to  the 
constant  tradition  regarding  the  divinely  inspired  Scripture : 
"In  proceeding  to  make  mention  of  these  things,  I  shall 
adopt,  to  commend  my  undertaking,  the  pattern  of  Luke  the 
Evangelist,  saying  on  my  own  account:  *  Forasmuch  as 
some  have  taken  in  hand,'  f  to  reduce  into  order  for  them- 
selves the  books  termed  apocryphal,  and  to  mix  them  up  with 
the  divinely  inspired  Scripture,  concerning  which  w^e  have 
been  fully  persuaded,  as  they  who  from  the  beginning  were 
eyewitnesses  and  ministers  of  the  word,  delivered  to  the 
fathers ;  it  seemed  good  to  me  also,  having  been  urged  thereto 
by  true  brethren,  and  having  learned  from  the  beginning, 
to  set  before  you  the  books  included  in  the  Canon,  and 
handed  down,  and  accredited  as  Divine." 

One  passage  will  illustrate  the  belief  of  Gregory  of  Nyssa : 
"The  Scripture,  'given  by  inspiration  of  God,'  as  the  Apostle 
calls  it,  is  the  Scripture  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  its  intention 
is  the  profit  of  men.  For  'every  scripture,'  he  says,  'is  given 
by  inspiration  of  God  and  is  profitable;'  and  the  profit  is 
varied  and  multifoi*m,  as  the  Apostle  says — 'for  doctrine,  for 
reproof,  for  correction,  for  instruction  in  righteousness.'  "  % 
(Against  Eimomius  Bk.  VII.  i.) 

It  is  superfluous  to  review  the  enormous  bulk  of  writings 
of  the  Latin  Fathers.  No  one  will  deny  that  they  unani- 
mously taught  the  doctrine  on  inspiration  which  the  Councils 
of  the  Church  has  now  defined.  St.  Ambrose  (On  the  Holy 
Spirit,  Bk.  III.  XVI.  112)  clearly  enunciates  the  doctrine: 
"  How,  then,  does  He  not  possess  all  that  pertains  to  God, 
Who  is  named  by  priests  in  baptism  with  the  Father  and  the 
Son,  and  is  invoked  in  the  oblations,  is  proclaimed  by  the 
vSeraphim  in  heaven  with  the  Father  and  the  Son,  dwells 

*  Cf.  2  Tim.  III.  16.     t  4a  i.e.  Ezra  and  Nehemiah.     :|:  2  Tim.  III.  15. 


THE   FATHERS  87 

in  the  Saints  with  the  Father  and  the  Son,  is  poured  upon 
the  just,  is  given  as  the  source  of  inspiration  to  the  prophets? 
And  for  this  reason  in  the  divine  Scripture  all  is  called 
deoTTveva-To^ ,  because  God  inspires  what  the  Spirit  has  spoken." 
St.  Jerome  fills  his  works  with  declarations  like  these: 
''  I  am  not,  I  repeat,  so  ignorant  as  to  suppose  that  any  of 
the  Lord's  words  is  either  in  need  of  correction,  or  is  not 
divinely  inspired."  (To  Marcella  Letter  XXVII.) ;  ''the 
Scriptures  were  written  and  promulgated  by  the  Holy 
Ghost."  (On  Ephesians  I.  to);  "all  the  Scriptures  were 
written  by  the  one  Holy  Spirit,  and  therefore  are  called 
one  book."     (On  Isaiah  XXIX.  9.) 

We  shall  close  these  few  representative  quotations  with 
these  declarations  of  St.  Augustine:  "For  it  seems  to  me 
that  most  disastrous  consequences  must  follow  upon  our 
believing  that  anything  false  is  found  in  the  sacred  books : 
that  is  to  say,  that  the  men  by  whom  the  Scripture  has  been 
given  to  us,  and  committed  to  writing,  did  put  down  in  these 
books  anything  false.  It  is  one  question  whether  it  may 
be  at  any  time  the  duty  of  a  good  man  to  deceive ;  but  it  is 
another  question  whether  it  can  have  been  the  duty  of  a 
writer  of  Holy  Scripture  to  deceive :  nay,  it  is  not  another 
question — it  is  no  question  at  all.  For  if  you  once  admit 
into  such  a  high  sanctuary  of  authority  one  false  statement 
as  made  in  the  v/ay  of  duty,*  there  will  not  be  left  a  single 
sentence  of  those  books  which,  if  appearing  to  any  one  diffi- 
cult in  practice  or  hard  to  believe,  may  not  by  the  same  fatal 
rule  be  explained  away,  as  a  statement  in  which,  inten- 
tionally, and  under  a  sense  of  duty,  the  author  declared  what 
was  not  true. "  (Letter  XXVIII.  3) :  "  For  I  confess  to  your 
Charity  that  I  have  learned  to  yield  this  respect  and  honour 
only  to  the  canonical  books  of  Scripture :  of  these  alone  do 
I  most  firmly  believe  that  the  authors  were  completely  free 
from  error.  And  if  in  these  writings  I  am  perplexed  by 
anything  which  appears  to  me  opposed  to  truth,  I  do  not 
hesitate  to  suppose  that  either  the  ms.  is  faulty,  or  the  trans- 
lator has  not  caught  the  meaning  of  what  was  said,  or  I 

*  Officiosum  mendacium. 


Ijidlmy^lfllin eaajaqtitj^;  ^nsft/ieaHlitLgi^  ]fid3Q;'3iotrdjcce<p)t  tibeir 
'tsachiqgas^  l-ind'^  'dcml  thei  ImeiBigrQtihdODsf  2  ibheL-dpkitons^beiif^ 
:heM±)y:13^eaiiQfbGt;j(&3aly  biecaus^  tixeysM^a^IsiiGceedj^  il£con- 
hTincm^jrrfjr  gMdgrnentro^^itsi^iJLt^i  eitlT^^dDuo-iiiie^iisiaf  rthfesfe 
j<:an<ahiital,irarij;iogsoth^mied5®sfi©rrb^ar^ 
snfey''rQ£(sI)K\/'XX  •i9t:r9J    rlisoiBlfi  oT)    ''.bsiiqanx  vbriivib 

sairarlysisriifjirbScoriceiitQ^f  ii^bspir^taoBia^eylwer)^  cdfittenti^b 
Lafcm  sbi3Be  s^arionidal  bo(ak?:^iboc^  tMEvord;  olrfG-Qdi,  mtliotrt 
analysing  the  question  ^^icESi£c&ir[jdia;yIi3Tt}i)e  fifs^  qufes-fcion 

f!3R:-^i^^^^i^^Yil£:rn9S9-iqsi  wsl  sa^rlj  o-oh  [Ik;!-  y7^ 

B  ioT^tel^l^f  A^fel<^MSag§iW"%te^?9riteijtei#^3#MH]^ 

:t£ffvM^fejb^MW§iJ%W$^#:;fe)  4^$^-^^ 

ir/ov 'Jf^hjfn^f "lA 'J^^olf. %^^(^^^^^  >^ftei;3^^t?^  ^^i^ 

imfeff§.^&%5^M?rfjOf>fe9^9^^^^^ 

every  part  of  the  Scripture  was  writt£ii__by  a  peculiar  in- 
stinct  and  impulse  of  the  Holy  Ghi!^p.i[-.rtoilyxja5idttflaghtly 


MELCHIOR  eA*:J^^rSrAND  BANNEZ  (S® 

f:>mit^j^4iq:-AfA^nl^j^jiti§it\^^  vmrejknms&i  to 

t)^^yhjo:^!^^T^%^tiViS&l}  i^'^dKta-oj^  aM  'l  otters :  rbyr::  irattiral 
^Tipwle^f  ^^ib^  ^ctcfeIrJ^,ttet7i>H^yidi((f^/^Oitf  heed  a^-stipebnattiml 
ligfej^I'^i^  '^5prj^$3ir©^^iajti0il;:tiliTiTOteltfofee)j  Mfeiferi  .triiJtii^ 

^^t^QS^Hi^h^l  tfe^f^/tJiiEgS',  jtihOu^rit^e^TTw^reirhTtmahi  jirutte 

^i^n^fftgi^  (\jylitb^riaoyI-$rreri5rfnn^M  Lrcio^g'hfiQi.  Ilcli6). 
rrniS?PI?li|ii^^B§tJ>^2  M  deepei^arid^imDferJelqiidtrir'bEbicrcbMe 
jBj^^bli%te^©^%l(^  femtii  ^^inmsti'ktiOwriliaib-^beiDitrifi  sradd 
fe:9k^i#r]Sgri|^^jjl|-qriisiif^^r^4)\<3f^fi£^  i^^caa^rbpjiihdferst 00^3111 

^Vjieji  ii}iQitl¥l?^/itQ)|^^  iwritenji^i;e  'jrfifctH35^iit:tdxl;h^o^itdE:s 

i^(j6ed  jteoiWJ^;  tj5ctl^MiiMJ/ib^  ita  iwDcte  nrt>  bairpe 

|t<5Si  ar,«^fii9i^J:Tc©i9Mif)>g'j^»d3iiijL^im<t|ioil  6i)fitrid);f^a±[d'rtb^rev 
fjc^je  :ti^?:^titm;fe':5>rg)tec^ed  b^^  sp^dJbdssistmiLbe  of libelHoly 
gibMl  te$t  fe>^flmlie©i^/fC)ii^©tfeLibifes3-ikdvsht]fuld  bei'dec^ved 
ij|,-^i^4hiT^B0  9d  omiqrnS  ^rLt  iBrl.t  'labio  n't  ,2335  9rf  rforrfv/ 
sii'J^  t;^elit'J|irfaW&]6'vS<?rip(ljwaffe"Js-^^  tolbeirlipdf^d^rferaitlie 
f §^^on):t&a1;rl,Q^(l{ilo1ra'oftit)f argVfgt^lad  iaMdto i:t}E^gari Jto^tli^ 
S^|:it§f  i.^7P^ed;j5j|^toMri3lfertJjiil9:g8^  torbmtij^dt  wpl 

Ji^Jdihtoii^it?  Jielj^i^tMi^ft'rtotr^lscDiSug  as  it  wei^ 

^is^^e^^^Mmm^'m^Vi^hhQi^i^^  [lohi^'jqmor) 

ys?.Tbet'#M^  tet>'i'tbi,§9-jbel>ibke7^jsat  aconcIasabniit'iFiiel^Holy 
^n-0hV^  6di  ^i^iMef^|3eaik/pmc$;ed^0r(^Mi¥iiteai^Veto 
jfci^)/l  sorft4tto^ri$t)  Ite  iM  -marim^D-iikfLdirsomefeimesi  injilire 
^e^R^)^  oTOt^dsJ>§)wl<;i;til^  tb©  ifinB3'Jf«9Hefi-df,[ai^rjeqtk]toli(ck 
|^'llE^f^^^ui^rp^3v^iaHbfiC^i£i^3-/y(jbb^  oSfiBi^^ftife)^  k^jkHneDjp^rlbs 
i^pr^ir^^mm^jtUm^  MbkH  trajieesend'Jetery  ci^artddfimrid 
gueb  9^  tlielM^stertyel;  tii$  IC'toity  fSciy[jtbfeQln(2^mtdctor.aM 
mtoy  mtoT)  i^bteg^-toi^l^:^'  lpia4?tsTit)f«t.<D  wMcb 

I^H  mM^miith§rj^m^pH^sr)Q^  Msnt-nxM  realsoH/^ai&ldieXipeni^Hc^i 
Btii^itii^^Hlfh^,^e  thiag^^YfeT^rtbeimp^tiffiligeitt  Stndratibeniiixfe 
.-writ-^'f  iTt.^yrr^  Mme^r t)$  jdefc^iy'^d  6'r,  ijfaayr  f of .^effi:  f *  ■  rTheref or©, 
in  all  these  tbings  partly  by  revelation,  partly  by  inipfelii^ 
^ii^7eM3tirigi^itfe^;^l9]iyr ;  pb^Jbi'^^s^ititb  itkerrwrilerdi^it  he 


90  BANNEZ 

The  second  conclusion:  The  Holy  Ghost  inspired  not 
only  the  matter  of  the  Scriptures  but  also  suggested  and 
dictated  every  word  by  which  they  should  be  written.  'Tor 
if  it  were  left  to  the  free  will  of  the  sacred  writer  to  choose 
the  words  by  which  he  should  express  or  write  the  thoughts, 
he  might  err  in  expressing  what  was  revealed  to  him ;  and 
thus  in  the  Scriptures  there  might  be  found  falsehood. " 

But  the  great  Dominican  felt  obliged  to  temper  this 
doctrine  in  his  third  conclusion:  **If  anyone  should  affirm 
that  the  composition  of  the  words  is  often  left  to  the  know- 
ledge and  diligence  of  the  sacred  writer  in  such  a  manner 
however,  that  such  a  one  affirms  the  necessary  assistance  of 
the  Holy  Ghost  lest  the  writer  err  in  the  words  or  in  their 
composition,  he  says  nothing  so  contrary  to  faith,  that  the 
assertion  should  be  gravely  censured ;  although  to  me  the 
opinion  seems  not  true  or  altogether  safe  on  account  of  the 
argument  adduced  to  prove  the  preceding  conclusion.  This 
conclusion  (that  verbal  inspiration  is  not  of  faith)  is  proven 
by  the  fact  that  when  the  sacred  writer  writes  the  things 
which  he  sees,  in  order  that  the  Scripture  be  called  inspired 
it  is  enough  that  the  Holy  Ghost  move  his  mind  to  write 
tliese  things,  and  that  he  be  guided  by  the  Holy  Ghost  lest 
he  forget  what  he  is  comimanded  to  write.  Therefore  the 
same  cooperation  of  the  Holy  Ghost  will  suffice  for  the 
composition  of  words  which  the  writer  of  himself  may  effect. 

'^  Nevertheless  it  is  safer  and  freer  from  blame  to  say 
that  as  the  Holy  Ghost  moves  the  mind  of  the  writer  to 
write,  so  also  he  inspires  the  words  and  composition.  And 
this  is  proven,  for,  unless  we  say  thus,  we  shall  be  scarcely 
able  to  assign  a  difference  between  the  Holy  Scriptures  and 
the  definitions  of  Councils.  For  in  both  cases  the  Holy 
Ghost  assists  lest  there  should  be  error.  And  if  in  both 
cases  the  words  and  their  composition  be  left  to  human  in- 
dustry, it  follows  that  there  is  no  difference,  for  also  the 
definitions  of  Councils  by  the  assistance  of  the  Holy  Ghost 
contain  infallible  truth,"    (Schol.  Comment,  in  D.  Thom. 

Q.I.) 

The  Thomistic  theologians  quite  generally  defended 
verbal  inspiration.     Most  recently  Zanecchia  (Div.  Inspir. 


LESSIUS    AND   HAMEL  91 

ad  Mentem  S.  Thomae, Romae,  1899,  1903,  p.  175)  declares: 
"  The  action  of  the  Holy  Ghost  in  inspiration  is  not  restricted 
to  the  conception  of  the  ideas  and  to  the  communicating  of 
them  to  the  inspired  writer ;  but  extends  itself  to  the  very 
writing,  that  is  to  the  words,  the  expressions,  the  style ;  in  a 
word,  to  all  that  which  is  written  by  the  inspired  writers, 
and  to  the  manner  in  which  they  expressed  these  things  in 
writing." 

Against  this  rigid  system  of  inspiration  a  reaction  was 
inaugurated  by  Lessius  and  Hamel.  In  1586,  Lessius  and 
Hamel,  in  their  lectures  at  Lou  vain,  taught  the  following 
propositions : — 

1.  "Ut  aliquid  sit  Scriptura  Sacra,  non  est  necessarium 
singula  ejus  verba  inspirata  esse  a  Spiritu  Sancto."  'That  a 
book  be  Holy  Scripture,  it  is  not  necessary  that  every  word 
of  it  be  inspired  by  the  Holy  Ghost.  '^ 

2.  '*Non  est  necessarium  ut  singulae  veritates  et  sen- 
tentiae  sint  immediate  a  Spiritu  Sancto  ipsi  Scriptori  inspira- 
tae. "  **It  is  not  necessary  that  every  truth  or  sentence  be 
immediately  inspired  into  the  writer  by  the  Holy  Ghost." 

3.  '' Liber  aliquis  (qualis  forte  est  secundus  Machabae- 
orum)  humana  industria  sine  assistentia  vSpiritus  Sancti 
scriptus,  (si  Spiritus  Sanctus  postea  testetur  nihil  ibi  esse 
falsum,  efficitur  Scriptura  Sacra."*  "A  book  (such  as  per- 
haps the  2nd  of  Maccabees),  written  by  human  industry, 
without  the  assistance  of  the  Holy  Ghost — if  the  Holy  Spirit 
afterwards  testify  that  nothing  false  is  contained  in  it — 
becomes  Holy  vScripture. ' ' 

These  propositions  were  at  once  assailed.  The  arch- 
bishops of  Cambrai  and  Mechlin  sent  them  to  the  Faculties 
of  Douai  and  Lou  vain,  t  They  were  condemed  by  both. 
The  third  was  especially  centured.  Estius,  who  drew  up 
the  censure,  in  his  ** Commentary  on  the  Epistles  "  gives  his 
own  opinion  as  follows :  "  From  this  passage  it  is  rightly  and 
truly  established,  that  all  the  sacred  and  canonical  Scripture 
is  written  by  the  dictation  of  the  Holy  Ghost ;  so  that  not 
only  the  sense,  but  every  word,  and  the  order  of  the  words, 

*  See  Theol.  Wirceburg.  torn.  i.  p.  23.       f  Ibid. 


^f)^kifigf  ^iwriitjmgj  mifDidrsdii^orEbFitHisaiiJ-^^  of 

vt-^'^^^tM  Mt^^^  ll2tM^l-3a$t|Jealed-^*ito  liMriSmbdhvie.  niTto 

^Fafcvt%^§f9P4ff^tte'^<ar-ai^pk>^i)"elt^^ 

t^Mc^'^;  tef^qgf^te^'^^cgnfsi^^^^^'O^  l^odwikti  sMr  DouaJi.,!j-fFlae 

disapproved  the  censures ;  but  Sixtus  V.  imposed^.satorae 
£iMti^"ctM%^^fiG4}^(S^6'i.^tw)dld^^^  ipnotmmitevn'^ht  ^Tab^^i.  has 
4i@^er:45<isnlde^^edr;l  TberceHsunes  sra^Bzien/byiDJAingfiOLjfere, 
giflrM^Iv^tali^ctfeiJiBaiidra'cmiJa^m(p@is;JB^  ^^adi.tfe 

Jesuit  propositions  are  defended  by  P.  Simon; sin:  liisdf^HJe- 
ftmmifei±ifqujB>3dnoliepctei^^:ik^  "     .  i 

this  he  states :  "In  the^e<pi%JcfeiHoRi^Ahe&:6fraq>be  B^  difii- 
-Gt^yr  if  i^iii^rfoie/uia)d«]DstiQodLrasritd^ey^  been  ex- 

plained bytqsiD?i^xeg^ds>^hjeritw^fh-^t 
the^.sacCBdJWiriteafsjwJ-alfe'i)^  8ir.p^u^ai^:^ii^pir^tit)Qi  ^d  (iir^r 
'ti()a,:a(i[aMi3tdncpiofyth^/H^Jyo61ioB^7irTlvlt'^ 
-tMtrfo^Mveary  i-senien)2^  astdribv:&t^tJ^^TAdp'^^^'M^U  necessary 
ithEffe'*heyr Af^d  X!eG^t$ra.©ewTa?nd-pO§i):M  im§|?m1^ip5ar|rf¥n 
Ite  HiJl^fSpiritr^'ltetr  is^^as^^wiritotJRi^^tiftiJk^iv^hiefor^^^^ 
new  HaBrine^UMeycihoiild  ^t\(m)t^e^ri}i^'^)mU'-^ 

tniqfe;:biM  tiiiktH^>^asfM>ffif5iMfe1&^t)1^rH^^ 
4n:a  spebkrL^j^aryoiiBiusxf  A^r':tedr  xmV^  -t^^mMmE^dt^^ 
things  which  they  had  heard  or  ^t^mu^'m^^Wj'f^^^v^J^'^J 
]a:]<]>WT3ii'^ndhtlmt^tQB-^ovdd  ^m^%  thmfdV(Jm^^rAJ^^:  the 
:oJ:liressi6nsiamd  ther^oirdsi^,  ®rMcy!gMifer»e^(^r'^^^/j^WQ^rth^fg. 
.:i:o*^'THi&  opiflidli^^^^^^to  ipjllie  ffiiore.probablejohe;  \Mrst, 
«l^caa^  th^vE  v^ri^t^sts  kMlX3thJeri^Mte4  ^writers  I jse^m^riat 
W  W-fhi  neisMMqif  fl^^  ff^^dQ^tie(jTiit©  >WriteItfc ,  thangsothey 
saw'd?i'te'&M^r©M'Sfe^hMlwitti"ds'^es;v,a^I&u^  learned  an -a 

I^M-|^n>wrg*irt6atrWMclflheigaw;iagis:6vididntI 
gi^th6'saMeHva¥^Mu$tMdwfWrbtey^  Sst'MaTk^'s^cfel^j^.a^iie 


jEJsin  Comment.  in-^^^2fad  TU'^wefe^ca^icII^'asd^oMlT  .k>5s\T  ooS 


LEssius  KKD  -imwmu  93] 

hesdd:>inom  ¥Me!i:/i  :::::•.:  ru  ^^lAxid/cX/likQ  \Yliat  h^vx^^eim^ 

And'Cnehr.wholkttow:.^  tMngfl^l^^bi^trlsintyealiiii^m)  iJi^Iart 
af-eDcpreBsmgt'thoiig|hfe3i^f?v^pabler^  ,vffibe|-^f(;^j 

if  'the  Molyi(^h(^iwMiesrtb!fmqMetri^. 
a[fnaiiuensesTrti  is.  kiotrnecessatyr  Mat'to  Iw^p^Mc^h^fU  steS!^ 
tlrir^st  a/rieTO7hut  is  iSniDjuighfthatf h^^d^^  tter^  imjl^-^^s^-i 

already jkriowAartd  thafc  jhera^$i:£!t;othemiiv-a.)5gefd§ti  Ml^y.%L^U/ 
words-Taaid  sEntences//  tJasaA  ijliey  rcomiri^viaytrtb^/l^Mtr'j^rMc^ 
"For  the  better  explaining  of  thi^jo*??'ernw^k!te¥ifc^^'#i 
thing' inayibeivwitteh.-tiitoMghinspi 

in  •  twoi  ways;/  iiFifstr,  Jbhat^  tthe^Molf^  'iGkpst )^fLJ^'M^  sup^rr 
natural  inspiiatiibti-^mi^ke  mandf'@st.#lrtb^jt^ingiii^9be5Wril^-:r 
ten  and. alt". the [word.^,  and  thu^itfee  -^ropheXs^mm^ Mi^iVi 
propheeiiEs;  a^  isieivid^ntj dmrJerei^ialt/X^KMI. /Mbp idi<Jta;te^ 
his  :pr6phiKdes/wibhr  suuhr  f^cJlit^^itH^  hbMem^it<yM»d^\imAl 
Secondly,  .that  thefjHdjly^/'GJiost'rby;^  ^p©oisijmp*sil^QSibQml^ 
e'-ceiteoamd aiipve  [thercai^r  fwhonlT  hel  agj^iuM  t.Qi  writer  th^ 
things-.whichjh©alrestdyitesiseen^H^^H/,<0&>4iJ.f^^ 

and :  sentence .  o v And  I :  kc^dr it  .^tol  "bie  o 'pmh^syiQ  n  lb)at. ,  -  5:nMn^) 
E.vang^lists^onirdfsacrMrihistpiaalns^aerjilqterrfhtis^^^^^  tha^t  tijte^j 
needed  nortea  .faew,  aM^pQsiti\^daspiraJbitto&»4i  Jlhimi^^ 
aboMt'  ei^ery  ilhingj ;  ■:i:todfio^irioSe^)mjW\m^fc 
()piniqnrf8r4hHrea^wtx/that  hyL^  j^amtraryiip!i?in^ipjg"i  M  wHt 

Spirit  by  [a  joew  insj^initi-oo,  mfe^riy  .(te^eH^ic^X)^  J)ur  ^y  r-^r^^nt^ 
prove'  thaii  thef (books )  of  :M£t:coabees.  arsj  TOtr  ;^n05iiieal:  Senpn 
tiireq  ■:;.:l:  »  iri;Ifit[>^K<3?e't'}4iis['Stv^Iittk'er]TO)i^d^  tha^t 

he  wrote  the  things  which  he  received  ir6'mth^gk^^(i:^^^/Wh^ 
bad  seea-t/hen3t,43iitibe'WcmMifeay  iitbalt  h&fw^tg)  'ife  jbings 
whisDhrhe  xec^iv/ediifrom  the.Koly/^Jbfc^sfeml^oji^peeaalJyi^o 


94  LESSIUS   AND   HAMEL 

tated  them.  .  .  .  Now  it  is  enough  for  the  sacred  his- 
torians that  God  by  a  special  impulse  move  them  to  write  the 
things  which  they  already  know,  and  infallibly  assist  them 
in  all  things.  By  this  is  not  removed  the  labor  of  calling  to 
mind  things  heard,  seen,  and  read,  and  of  coordinating  them, 
and,  as  one  judges  most  fitting,  of  expressing  them  in  proper 
words.  Wherefore  it  comes  to  pass  that  the  more  eloquent 
speak  more  eloquently,  and  the  less  eloquent  less  ornately." 

It  is  evident  here  that  the  difficulty  lies  in  the  ambiguous 
use  of  the  term  inspiration.  Lessius  did  not  distinguish 
between  revelation  and  inspiration.  In  his  explanation  he 
makes  his  meaning  clear,  that  he  extends  inspiration  to  all 
the  Scriptures,  and  in  a  proper  degree  to  the  words  them- 
selves ;  while  he  restricts  revelation  to  those  things  which  the 
writers  did  not  know  by  natural  means.  If  this  distinction 
be  inserted  we  believe  that  no  one  has  written  on  the  theme 
more  clearly  or  correctly. 

In  treating  the  third  proposition  Lessius  is  no  less  fortu- 
nate: "The  third  opinion,  leaving  out  the  clause  in  paren- 
theses, seems  to  me  wholly  certain,  unless  there  be  question 
about  terms.  Let  us  suppose  that  by  a  pious  man  well 
furnished  with  the  knowledge,  a  pious  history  be  written  b}^ 
the  impulse  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  that  the  writer  without 
the  special  assistance  of  inspiration  write  the  truth,  and  com- 
mit no  error.  If  the  Holy  Ghost,  by  some  prophet  or  other- 
wise, attest  that  what  is  there  written  be  true  and  saving,  I 
see  no  reason  why  that  book  should  not  have  the  authorit}^ 
of  Holy  Scripture,  since  it  has  the  same  motive  of  credibility 
that  any  other  prophecy  has,  namely,  divine  authority. 
And  I  say  this  not  that  I  assert  that  such  was  the  method  of 
inspiration  of  any  part  of  Holy  Scripture ;  nay,  more,  I  believe 
that  in  fact  nothing  of  this  kind  is  found  in  Holy  Scripture, 
but  I  speak  only  of  possibility.  Hence  the  proposition  is 
conditional.  If  God  willed  he  could  have  acted  in  this 
manner  in  the  Scriptures,  for  it  does  not  imply  a  contradic- 
tion, and  such  Scripture  would  be  equal  to  the  other  parts 
in  divine  authority." 

We  see  here  that  Lessius  has  retracted  somewhat.  By 
cutting  out  the  parenthetical  clause  he  removes  the  question 


LESSIUS   AND   HAMEL  95 

to  the  region  of  speculations  on  the  possible,  and  no  man  can 
object  to  his  reasoning. 

The  Faculties  of  Louvain  and  Douai  had  charged  Lessius 
with  the  error  of  the  Anomoei,  an  obscure  sect  described  by 
S.  Epiphanius.  Their  capital  error  was  to  divide  the  Scrip- 
tures into  the  divine  and  human  parts,  and  to  deny  authority 
to  the  things  which  the  writers  wrote  as  men.  Lessius  in 
his  defense  shows  how  absurd  it  was  to  accuse  him  of  their 
error,  and  adds:  "We  say,  therefore,  that  all  parts  of  the 
Scripture  are  of  infallible  truth,  and  are  of  the  Holy  Ghost 
who  inspires  by  a  new  revelation,  or  moves  by  a  special  im- 
pulse, and  assists  in  every  word  and  sentence ;  and  as  we  have 
elsewhere  abundantly  demonstrated,  we  hold  that  there  is 
not  in  them  the  least  error,  for  it  would  redound  upon  the 
Holy  Ghost,  and  the  authority  of  the  whole  Scripture  would 
totter;  although  it  is  not  necessary  that  the  Holy  Ghost 
inspire  everything,  in  a  special  manner  illumining  the  writer. " 
(In  Schneeman  Controv.  de  div.  grat.  Friburgi,  1881,  467 
seqq.) 

We  see  here  the  same  confusion  between  inspiration  and 
revelation. 

The  Faculty  of  Louvain  answered  Lessius  in  a  treatise 
called  "  Antapologia, "  and  Lessius  again  delivered  a  defence 
in  which  he  makes  the  issues  still  clearer.  Among  other 
things  he  says  that  even  when  God  did  not  give  to  the  sacred 
writers  new  revelations,  ^^he  directed  them  in  everything,  lest 
they  should  write  other  things,  or  in  a  manner  different  from 
his  good-pleasure ;  but  this  took  place  without  a  new  revela- 
tion, or  new  mode  of  understanding.  Thus  it  is  plain  in 
what  sense  the  writer  of  H.  Maccab.  could  declare  his  tongue 
to  be  the  pen  of  a  ready  scribe,  because  he  was  moved  and 
directed  by  the  Holy  Ghost ;  and  also  (it  is  plain)  in  what 
sense  he  could  not  so  declare,  for  the  Holy  Ghost  did  not 
beforehand  form  all  the  words  in  his  mind,  as  one  does  who 

in  the  proper  sense  dictates For  the  concept 

of  Holy  Scripture  does  not  essentially  include  that  all  the 
material  words  be  dictated  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  but  this  is 
an  accessory  and  ornament  (of  inspiration).  Otherwise  if 
the   Hebrew  and   Greek  exemplars  were  lost  the  Church 


WQuIdorhe:-witk©uiIct1ite)cfMtnSGdrpt^^ 
Latin  Church  would  not  have  the  Scr^ttfe^^fcatriM  3^t& 
edi'fekail  w0$tld^fmdt3:beiiSGBjitm3rff;iiv/i;o.J  'to  aBtk^^H^m^Thok 
clds^lyJiY9f'9ba}bsee)-tha^[ibh®i3e3seiicefiQ(f  MkM}i<Bc?ipttaffet  ddm 
sis|5ft)c^'jithis[ilth^  )the^pTopDBiiixJk|te  ith^rwoM^f(t^^lCMfi  i5 
whaitefsrer:  tongue tefecpr^iedq  nnmurl  hnConcetkin^  tJieifhfe^ 

ttod  jpferharp^  tbeobQok  ofeMacdatedfewasr^mtteteL  ^"^^ki^fi[ 
ii^iiu'$1)ryr,7l(TsiM  tKit -a^y^iopinimii'.  hiN  as:  ^tMe'  dpiniQH  TJ^ 

<^^r^^$j  (.^bf'S§?il^)itfo$;i  Wm^  i?rri^pt:^l7^r55rh^Feiiiersay^j 
|^-^S{^b9plc^,  ^iiye;,tji€  -Q^glj^rCJit^cJi  ^cefe§'(S[:ffe^i?:i;-inttj 

ifd^heystef  ^yf^l^^'^y  :fti-i^g^i?i>  mf^e'^imr^3^'^m^'fpid^^'^Q^ 

depends  not  on  the  author  but  on  the  authority  Oio\^. 

^hwRhB^^.k^^h^yflm^  !^jm^w§^mm^i^.etr^m:dStM  in- 

faUible,  whoever  he  said  to  be  the  author,  whom  I  sh§M^^^7 
4§S9j'^?^^WQ^rr|gbl5ef^^^fp^gj^9vW$i|e|oOf  j$^§r^  'Mftter. 
T^isij.js,  |i^-^pii9.pi>fjr>TS^e;;^id>jnjE)jt£apjM^^ 
te^^J^^^i^^lie  a^rJte  (^fjM§§e^bee^iiw^Ijarr|aithMrt53an{ 

lk¥^ift.%^r  JS^^?^  L^^t^  ff^Qo  suefe  r]^ 
wil:^j4t;J^ii,f  #^§ist^^^ 

^Ji9§feq  S-^pMT  ^m-dibriBtd-iebnu  lo  ebom  v/sri  lo  jio'd 

k^^'fifc'^lfeffeSO:hi;^:4fct^io^i^fothfe'B^^^  ^InfO^tiiin^  ae-riianner 
mi-^^^jUo^iOni^ ,  JbMrii(n^t!t^,  :^nt;^h(^  tefter^i-woMijaM  "^th^ 
f)a|4er:  -of  t^tys  -j^y^rds  and  the  vvh^e;  ^Itru^j^jw^  mTof  cfOodr,  as 
thg>uig: Ij  hims41^^^14%ra^5wrjtim^':'>[{^titafi'0Jfi  IIL'  SHitij 
lill{if>-h  I  JcodD  vIoH  9fIJ  vd  bs:tiiJoib  od  abiov/  Im'isJ;^m 
t:  slmtk^tEteat  f of  itheiqjoiit^oiretsynthato  t^hb^  wagfisioaboniLt 
diyinfe'^rja^e ,  riiBBsijasi^ras-narfifiiisdi^sf ood^Andrinisreprede^ 


LESSIUS   AND    HAMEL  97 

His  statements  were  torn  from  their  context,  and  often 
garbled  into  a  distorted  meaning.  It  is  true  he  used  an 
ambiguous  term  in  his  first  two  propositions ;  but  his  explan- 
ation does  honor  to  his  knowledge  and  his  faith.  His  third 
proposition  is  not  well  enunciated.  His  own  expunging  of 
the  parenthesis  is  a  retractation ;  but  dealing  with  a  possi- 
bility he  utters  nothing  contrary  to  faith.  As  Bishop 
Gasser  rightly  argued  in  the  Vatican  Council,  that  Council's 
condemnation  of  the  theory  of  a  subsequent  inspiration  does 
not  ax3ply  to  Lessius.  He  spoke  of  a  possibility ;  the  Council 
spoke  of  the  existing  books.  Moreover^  Lessius  admits  into 
his  hypothetical  book  the  element  of  present  inspiration; 
because  the  Holy  Ghost  must  approve  the  book  "through 
a  prophet,  or  in  some  other  manner."  Therefore  Lessius 
makes  the  authority  of  the  book  the  effect  of  the  Holy 
Ghost.  For  instance  let  us  suppose^  as  every  one  is  free 
to  do,  that  Jason  who  wrote  the  original  of  IL  Maccab. 
was  not  inspired.  Let  us  suppose  that  the  writer  who 
abridged  these  books  into  the  one  book  of  H.  Maccab. 
wrote  no  word  of  his  own,  but  only  selected  from  the 
five  books.  Still  the  element  of  inspiration  would  be 
there,  not  disclosing  new  truths;  but  moving  the  writer 
to  make  the  abridgment,  and  positively  aiding  him  to  ar- 
range these  things  into  an  infallible  book.  Of  course  we  are 
speaking  of  a  mere  hypothesis ;  for  it  seems  evident  that  the 
writer  of  Maccabees  did  not  servilely  copy  passages  from 
Jason ;  but  compendiously  wrote  for  a  religious  end  certain 
things,  in  an  epoch  which  had  been  more  extensively  de- 
scribed by  the  historian  Jason. 

Of  Lessius'  three  propositions  Bellarmine  speaks  thus: 
**The  three  propositions  on  Scripture,  enunciated  without 
explanation,  sound  bad,  and  are  liable  to  calumny.  But 
Father  Lessius  has  rightly  explained  the  two  first.  For  the 
third  he  has  recently  written  an  apology,  and  although  he 
has  not  satisfied  me  fully,  yet  the  opinion  as  modified  and 
tempered  by  him  seems  tolerable."  (Apud  Schneeman,  op. 
cit.) 

The  system  of  inspiration  taught  by  Bellarmine  in  the 
main  agrees  with  the  two  first  propositions  of  Lessius.    Thus 


98  SUAREZ 

he  declares:  'The  first  is  that  the  Scripture  is  the  word  of 
God.  immediately  revealed,  and  written  as  it  were  by  the 
dictation  of  God.  .  .  .  But  this  is  not  to  be  understood 
as  though  the  sacred  writers  always  had  new  revelations,  and 
wrote  what  they  beforehand  were  ignorant  of ;  for  it  is  cer- 
tain that  the  Evangelists  Matthew  and  John  wrote  what  they 
saw ;  but  Mark  and  Luke,  what  they  heard,  as  Luke  declares 
in  the  beginning  of  his  Gospel.  The  sacred  writers  are  said 
therefore  to  have  an  immediate  revelation,  and  to  have  writ- 
ten the  words  of  God  himself,  either  because  certain  new 
things,  before  unknown,  were  revealed  to  them  ...  or 
because  God  immediately  inspired  and  moved  the  writers 
to  write  the  things  which  they  had  seen  and  heard,  and  di- 
rected them  lest  they  should  err  in  any  matter. "     (De  Cone. 

I.   2.    12.) 

Suarez  defines  Holy  Scripture  to  be  "a  writing  by  the 
impulse  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  who  dictated  not  only  the  sense 
but  also  the  words."  After  describing  the  necessity  of 
verbal  inspiration,  he  tempers  the  doctrine  as  follows:  "In 
two  ways  the  words  of  Holy  Scripture  may  be  understood  to 
be  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  either  by  a  special  antecedent  motion 
or  only  by  an  assistance,  and  as  it  were,  safeguarding.  The 
first  way  is  when  the  Holy  Ghost  either  imprints  the  mental 
word  by  infused  ideas,  or  specially  moves  and  calls  up  pre- 
existing ideas,  and  this  mode  is  the  most  proper  to  (the  Holy 
Ghost),  and  the  most  perfect,  and  most  probably  was  fol- 
lowed w^hen  the  mysteries  to  be  written  were  supernatural, 
and  surpassed  human  reason. 

But  it  seems  not  necessary,  although  recent  learned  men 
so  teach,  that  always  the  words  be  dictated  in  this  special 
way.  For  when  a  sacred  writer  writes  something  which 
is  of  natural  reason  and  within  the  compass  of  the  senses,  it 
seems  sufficient  that  the  Holy  Spirit  specially  assist  him  and 
save  him  from  all  error  and  untruth  and  from  all  words 
which  are  not  profitable  or  becoming  to  Holy  Scripture,  re- 
moving everything  which  might  suggest  such  (unfitting) 
words,  and  for  the  rest  permitting  the  writer  to  use  his  mem- 
ory, and  his  ideas,  and  diligence  in  writing  as  Luke  acknowl- 
edges in  the  beginning  of  his  Gospel.     It  is  enough  there- 


MARCHINI  99 

fore  that  either  in  one  way  or  in  the  other  according  to  the 
exigency  of  the  matter,  the  words  be  of  the  Holy  Ghost." 

To  the  question:  Whether  there  be  anything  in  the 
Holy  Scriptures  which  was  not  written  by  the  action  of  the 
Holy  Ghost,  and  consequently  is  not  Holy  Scripture,  Suarez 
replies:  "The  Holy  Writer  writes  nothing  purely  of  him- 
self, but  everything  and  each  thing  is  by  the  direction  of  the 
Holy  Ghost."     (De  Fide  V.  3.) 

A  classic  writer  on  this  theme  is  Marchini  (ti773)-  In 
his  work  De  Divinitate  et  Canonicitate  Sacrorum  Bibliorum, 
Art.  v.,  he  defines  the  concept  of  inspiration:  "The  first 
question  which  demands  solution  is  whether  the  Holy  Ghost 
placed  every  word  in  the  sacred  writer's  mind  and  mouth. 
This  truth  is  evident  to  those  who  study  the  question  that 
not  to  leave  to  the  writer's  natural  faculties  the  selection  of 
the  words  and  the  diction  is  needless  and  superfluous  for 
our  defence  of  the  truth,  dignity,  and  infallibility  of  Holy 
Scripture.  It  is  enough  for  this  defence  that  as  regards  the 
things  written,  God  infuse  them  into  the  writer's  mind,  or 
call  them  up  in  his  mind,  and  that  he  assist  him  that  he 
employ  apt  words,  and  leave  aside  unfitting  ones.  Why 
therefore  should  the  Holy  Ghost  inspire  every  word,  who  is 
neither  wanting  in  the  necessary,  nor  redundant  in  the 
superfluous?"  Marchini  confirms  this  from  the  sacred  writers' 
diversity  of  style,  from  the  fact  that  the  same  thing  is  de- 
scribed in  different  words  by  different  writers,  from  the 
literary  imperfections  of  Scripture,  and  from  the  authority  of 
the  versions.  He  promulgates  more  accurately  Lessius' 
principle  that  revelation  does  not  extend  to  all  parts  of 
Scripture.  He  defines  inspiration  to  be  "a  special  impulse 
of  the  Holy  Ghost  to  write,  and  a  directing  and  assistance 
governing  the  mind  and  soul  of  the  writer  which  permits 
him  not  to  err,  and  causes  him  to  write  what  God  wills." 

Marchini  strongly  condemns  "the  error  of  those  who 
violate  the  Scriptures  by  teaching  that  in  certain  minor  things 
as  they  say,  not  necessary  to  salvation,  the  Prophets  and 
Apostles  wrote  merely  as  men  without  that  special  action 
of  God,  without  which  a  book  can  not  be  divine."  He 
alleges  as  proof  H.  Tim.  IH.  16;  H.  Peter.  I.  21,  and  the 


100  FRANZ  ELIN 

authority  of  the  Fathers.  He  declares  that  the  whole 
authority  of  the  Scriptures  would  totter  if  in  minor  things, 
errors  be  admitted,  since  certain  limits  between  great  and 
small  can  not  be  admitted."  Marchini  differentiates  the 
Holy  Scriptures  from  other*  infallible  documents  by  the  fact 
that  a  positive  divine  action  pervades  the  whole  Scripture. 
And,  he  says,  "this  divine  afflatus  or  inspiration  can  be 
present,  even  though  God  does  not  by  a  special  action  fur- 
nish the  words  nor  the  sentences.  .  .  That  is,  if  the  Holy 
Ghost  assists  the  writer  whom  he  beforehand  moved  to 
write ;  if  he  aptly  suggests  that  which  he  wishes  written,  if 
perchance  the  writer's  memory  fail  him ;  if  he  enlightens  the 
mind  with  that  light  which  expels  all  pernicious  ignorance, 
and  removes  rashness;  if  he  strengthens  with  such  power 
that  things  are  written  faithfully,  plainly,  and  consistently ; 
if  he  brings  to  the  mind  things  hidden,  sublime  and  unknown; 
if  he  leaves  no  part  of  Scripture  deprived  of  his  protection, 
surely  the  books  will  be  written  by  God's  inspiration,  al- 
though the  manner  of  speech,  and  the  sentences  often  pro- 
ceed from  man's  mind,  memory,  study,  thought,  and  dili- 
gence." 

Among  the  great  theologians  of  the  XIX.  Century, 
Cardinal  Franzelin  holds  an  eminent  place.  His  system  of 
inspiration  has  been  made  the  subject  of  a  special  attack  by 
that  reaction  which  in  our  day  has  set  in  towards  a  more 
liberal  view  of  inspiration.  In  his  work  "Tractatus  de 
Divina  Traditione  et  Scriptura"  (Ed.  3,  Romae,  1882)  he 
treats  the  question  of  inspiration  at  length.  Among  other 
things  he  declares  that  the  books  of  Scripture  are  of  divine 
authority  "  for  the  reason  that  they  are  the  books  of  God, 
and  God  is  their  author  by  his  supernatural  action  on  the 
human  co-writers,  which  action  by  ecclesiastical  usage 
drawn  from  the  Scriptures  themselves  is  called  inspiration. " 

"  A  book  is  divine  in  the  strict  sense  for  the  reason  that  it 
is  written  by  God  through  the  instrumentality  of  a  man 
whom  God  so  moves  to  write,  and  in  whom  God  so  operates 
in  writing,  that  God  himself  in  the  strict  sense  should  be 
considered  the  principal  Author.  This  supernatural  and  ex- 
traordinary action  of  God  is  called  inspiration"  (Thesis  II.) 


FRANZELIN  101 

From  intrinsic  and  extrinsic  evidence  Franzelin  places 
the  essence  of  inspiration  in  a  charisma  gratis  datum  enlight- 
ening so  that  the  minds  of  inspired  men  understand  in 
order  to  write  the  truths  which  by  Scripture  God  wishes  to 
give  to  his  Church,  and  the  wills  are  moved  to  consign  these 
only  to  writing;  and  thus  assisted  man  under  the  action  of 
God,  the  principal  cause,  infallibly  executes  the  divine 
coimsel.  Hence  distinguishing  between  inspiration  and 
assistance,  inspiration  must  be  said  to  embrace  the  truths, 
and  the  formal  word ;  while  assistance  is  extended  to  the 
material  words."     (Thesis  III.) 

The  teaching  of  T^essius  that  revelation  is  not  essential 
to  inspired  Scripture  has  now  become  the  universal  teaching. 

Franzelin  distinguishes  the  formal  part  of  a  book  which 
he  calls  the  veritates  from  the  material  part,  that  is  the  words. 
He  demands  inspiration  as  he  has  described  it  for  the  formal 
element ;  but  for  the  words  he  requires  only  an  assistance  to 
guarantee  that  they  aptly  express  the  thoughts :  "  Regarding 
the  words  it  is  clear  that  the  truths,  that  is  the  thoughts  of 
the  principal  Author,  can  not  be  expressed  in  writing  unless 
terms  be  chosen  fitting  to  express  the  sense.  If  therefore, 
God  by  his  inspiration  of  the  things  and  thoughts  thus  acts 
on  the  inspired  man  to  the  intent  that  he  write,  so  that  the 
writing,  infallibly  in  virtue  of  the  divine  operation,  truly 
and  sincerely  contains  the  thoughts  of  God,  there  must  ac- 
company the  divine  inspiration  or  be  included  in  it  such  a 
divine  operation  that  the  man  writing,  not  only  actually  elect, 
but  also  infallibly  elect  terms  apt  truthfully  and  sincerely 
to  express  the  inspired  substance  and  sentences,  and  that  he 
be  thus  made  infallible  in  choosing  words  and  other  things 
which  pertain  to  the  material  part  (of  the  inspired  writings) . 
A  man  inspired  in  mind  and  will  to  write  the  thoughts  of 
God,  but  left  to  himself  in  the  election  of  the  terms  would 
remain  fallible  in  expressing  the  inspired  thoughts ;  and  by 
this  therefore  it  would  not  follow  infallibly  that  a  book 
written  by  such  inspiration  would  be  in  the  full  sense  in- 
spired Scripture  and  the  word  of  God. " 

''From  what  has  been  said  it  is  evident  what  is  this  divine 
operation  which  we  declare  to  accompany  inspiration.     The 


102  FRANZELIN 

aim  of  most,  at  least,  of  the  Holy  books  is  such  that  the  for- 
mal object  of  the  book  is  not  affected  if  the  same  things  and 
sentences  he  expressed  by  different  words  or  different 
style,  provided  that  words  apt  and  befitting  the  subject  be 
chosen.  .  .  .  ^For  we  do  not  believe  that  the  Gospel 
consists  in  the  words  of  Scripture  but  in  the  sense ;  not  on 
the  surface,  but  in  the  marrow;  non  in  sermonum  foliis 
sed  in  radice  ratio nis. '  "    (S.  Jerome  on  Gal.  I.  II.  12.) 

"Therefore,  from  the  definition  of  inspiration  and  from 
the  fact  that  God  is  the  Author  of  the  Scriptures  by  means 
of  human  co-writers,  so  that  through  the  very  action  of  God 
upon  inspired  men  it  is  infallibly  certain  that  the  Scriptures 
are  the  books  of  God  as  their  Author ;  in  most  cases,  that  is 
where  the  choosing  of  certain  words  instead  of  other  equiva- 
lents pertains  merely  to  the  material  part,  there  is  no  reason 
to  afhrm  that  God  by  an  antecedent  supernatural  action 
furnished  the  words  and  the  style  of  writing,  and  individually 
determined  them.  But  there  is  a  reason  of  affirming  God's 
assistance  by  which  he  so  aided  the  writers  in  choosing  apt 
terms,  that  in  expressing  inspired  thoughts,  they  were  fully 
infallible." 

Franzelin  adduces  three  classes  of  arguments  to  refute 
the  mechanical  idea  of  verbal  inspiration.  One  proof  for  the 
thesis  under  consideration  is  found  in  the  variety  of  style 
prevailing  among  the  different  authors.  Isaiah  is  polished 
and  cultured  in  his  diction ;  Jeremiah,  on  the  contrary,  and 
Amos  are  less  polished  and  coarser  in  their  style.  Isaiah 
was  in  high  social  rank,  while  Jeremiah  was  a  burgher  from 
Anathoth,  and  Amos,  a  cowherd.  And  differences  of  style 
exist  among  all  the  inspired  writers,  due  to  their  different 
characteristics. 

Secondly  in  the  Scriptures,  sometimes  the  same  fact  is 
related  by  different  writers  in  different  ways.  For  instance, 
the  consecration  of  the  chalice  is  related  in  four  different 
ways  by  St.  Math.,  XXVI.  28;  St.  Mark.  XIV.  24;  St.  Luke, 
XXII.  20,  and  St.  Paul,  I.  Cor.  XL,  25.  These  speak  of  the 
same  words  of  Christ,  as  he  used  them  once  for  all  at  the  Last 
Supper.  If  the  Holy  Ghost  had  inspired  the  words,  how 
could   we   account   for  these   divergencies?     Here  applies 


BONFRERE  103 

aptly  what  St.  Augustine  said  of  the  inspired  writers:  *'Ut 
quisque  meminerat  eos  expHcasse  manifestum  est." 

The  writers  of  the  New  Testament  rarely  or  never  quote 
the  old  Testament  literally,  but  only  the  sense.  In  the 
words  of  St.  Jerome:  ''Hoc  in  omnibus  pene  testimoniis 
quae  de  veteribus  libris  in  novo  assumpta  sunt  Testamento 
observare  debemus,  quod  memoriae  crediderint  Evangelistae 
vel  Apostoli,  et  tantum,  sensu  explicato,  saepe  ordinem 
commutaverint,  nonnunquam  vel  detraxerint  verba  vel 
addiderint."    (Comment,  in  Epist.  ad  Galatas.) 

Thirdly,  the  inspired  writers  themselves  disclaim  verbal 
inspiration,  asserting  that  their  compositions  had  been  the 
result  of  toil,  observation  and  research.  The  text  of  II. 
Maccab.  already  quoted  is  an  example  of  this.  Also  the 
preface  of  the  Gospel  of  St.  Luke,  and  various  other  passages. 
Now,  if  the  inspiration  had  been  verbal  this  labor  and  re- 
search would  be  inconceivable.  Again,  the  writer  of  the 
second  book  of  Maccab.  XV.  39,  in  closing  his  work,  speaks 
thus  of  his  work:  "I  also  with  these  things,  will  draw  my 
discourse  to  an  end.  And  if  (I  have  written)  well,  and  as  is 
befitting  history,  this  I  should  wish;  if  only  weakly  and  com- 
monly, /x€T/}tW,  mediocriter,  (not  above  the  average)  this 
is  all  I  could  achieve,"  etc.  No  such  apology  for  shortcom- 
ings were  necessary,  had  the  Holy  Ghost  inspired  the  words. 

Bonfrere,  the  disciple  of  Lessius,  had  taught  a  doctrine  in 
some  points  identical  with  that  taught  by  Lessius.  He  de- 
fended a  three-fold  relation  of  the  Holy  Ghost  to  the  in- 
spired writings;  antecedent,  concomitant,  and  consequent. 
According  to  Bonfrere,  the  antecedent  relation  had  actuated 
the  Prophets,  who  committed  to  writing  the  things  revealed, 
without  any  part  in  their  conception  except  a  passive  action, 
simply  as  an  amanuensis  writes  down  the  dictated  ideas, 
always,  of  course,  in  their  own  terms,  as  we  have  just  seen. 

The  concomitant  relation  directed  the  writer  as  one  would 
direct  another  in  writing  a  human  document,  not  permitting 
him  to  fall  into  error.  Bonfrere  even  admitted  in  this  mode 
a  vague  general  impulse  of  the  Holy  Spirit  to  write  such  a 
history.  He  also  admitted  a  sort  of  prompting  influence,  in 
case  the  writer's  memory  failed  him,  according  to  that  pas- 


104  BONFRERE 

sage  in  St.  Matthew:  ''He  (the  Holy  Ghost)  will  suggest  all 
things  to  you,  whatever  I  shall  have  said  to  you." 

Bonfrere  asserted  this  mode  of  inspiration  to  have  had 
place  in  historical  books,  and  in  things  known  by  natural 
means.  He  therefore  applied  it  to  the  Gospels,  Acts  of  the 
Apostles,  Books  of  Maccabees,  and  the  other  historical  books, 
except  the  parts  of  Genesis  which  treat  of  the  origin  of  the 
World. 

The  consequent  relation  of  the  Holy  Ghost  to  Scripture 
Bonfrere  describes  thus:  "The  Holy  Ghost  has  a  con- 
sequent relation  to  Holy  Scripture  if  something  be  written 
by  merely  himian  agency  without  the  help,  direction  or  assist- 
ance of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  the  Holy  Ghost  afterward  give 
testimony  that  all  that  is  there  written  is  true.  For  it  is 
certain  that  then  the  whole  writing  would  be  the  word  of 
God  and  would  have  the  same  infallible  authority  as  other 
things  which  were  written  by  the  direction  or  inspiration 
of  the  Holy  Ghost,  as  it  is  the  King's  word  when  some  secre- 
tary or  notary  by  his  own  authority  draws  up  a  royal  decree 
or  public  document  which  the  King  afterwards  ratifies  and  to 
which  he  affixes  his  seal,  and  it  is  of  equal  authority  as  that 
which  the  King  himself,  conceives,  writes  or  dictates." 

Bonfrere  believes  that  in  this  manner  the  Holy  Ghost 
accepted  the  sayings  of  Aratus  and  Epimenides,  Acts  XVII. 
28 ;  Titus  I.  1 2 .  * *In  the  same  way  the  Holy  Ghost  may  make 
Holy  Scripture,  by  testifying  that  all  is  true  in  it,  a  whole 
history  or  a  book  treating  of  morals  or  of  anything  else 
which  was  written  by  a  iminspired  author."  (Praeloquia  in 
Script.  Sac.) 

Bonfrere  expressly  denied  that  such  had  been  the  origm 
of  any  of  the  books  now  possessed  by  the  Church,  but  as- 
serted the  non-repugnance  of  such  action,  and  the  possibil- 
ity that  such  might  have  been  the  origin  of  some  of  the  in- 
spired works  which  the  Church  has  lost. 

Of  Bonfrere's  consequent  inspiration  it  must  be  said,  that 
to  assert  it  of  any  of  the  existing  books  of  the  Holy  Script ture, 
is  condemned  in  express  terms  in  the  definition  of  the  Vatican 
Council ;  if  it  only  deals  with  a  possibility,  then  it  is  false  and 
absurd;  for  a  subsequent  inspiration  is  a  contradiction  in 


JAHN  105 

terms.  As  Comely  rightly  says:  ''repugnat  in  adjecto." 
For  to  constitute  inspiration,  we  must  have  this  supernatural 
psychological  action  in  the  mind  of  the  writer,  and  if  this  be 
not  verified,  no  subsequent  action  can  supply  it.  * 'Factum 
infectum  fieri  non  potest."  But  one  might  say,  God  is  free 
to  approve  a  book  in  such  way,  and  if  he  were  to  do  so,  would 
not  the  book  be  made  inspired  Scripture?  It  would  be  an 
infallibly  true  writing,  rendered  infallible  by  its  subsequent 
approbation,  but  not  inspired  Scripture]  for  the  essential 
element  required  for  inspiration  never  was  there.  Where- 
fore, that  such  was  the  origin  of  any  of  our  Holy  Books  is 
denied  by  the  Council  of  the  Vatican ;  the  possibility  of  such 
origin  is  disproved  by  a  consideration  of  the  essential  elements 
of  inspiration. 

Nevertheless  sentences,  parts  of  books,  and  in  fact,  any 
document  whatever,  passing  through  the  hands  of  an  in- 
spired writer,  and  used  by  him  in  writing  a  book,  under  the 
influence  of  inspiration,  would  become  inspired  Scripture. 
This  is  not  consequent  inspiration,  but  the  employment  of 
an  inspired  writer's  natural  faculties  in  collecting  material. 
It  is  not  probable  that  any  great  part  of  any  inspired  book 
was  produced  in  this  way;  but  some  data  most  certainly 
were  thus  employed. 

Jahn  departed  farther  from  the  truth  than  Bonfrere  had 
gone:  asserting  inspiration  to  be,  in  general,  only  a  negative 
assistance  protecting  from  error,  he  defended  that  such 
was  the  general  origin  of  our  books.  Logical  in  his  opinion, 
and  recognizing  that  inspirationimported  something  positive, 
he  boldly  proclaimed  that  inspiration  was  a  misapplied  term ; 
but,  consecrated  by  usage,  it  was  difficult  to  change. 

The  concomitant  relation  of  the  Holy  Ghost  to  Scripture 
is  also  erroneous.  This  mode  is  a  merely  negative  influence. 
The  Holy  Ghost,  as  it  were,  watches  the  inspired  writer  to 
protect  him  from  error,  and  actually  does  save  him  when  he 
would  otherwise  err.  This  is  not  sufficient  to  make  God  the 
Author  of  the  Holy  Books.. 

Inspiration  is  an  active,  positive  influence  in  every  part  of 
the  Holy  Scripture.  No  other  relation  can  constitute  God 
the  author  of  the  Holy  Writ.     If,  indeed,  we  were  to  defend 


106  SCHMID 

that  God  only  preserved  from  error,  as  Calmet  asserted,  it 
would  follow,  that  if  the  writer  were  exempt  from  error  of 
himself,  unaided  by  any  other  cause,  God  would  not  be  the 
author  of  the  book  so  written ;  and,  as  this  would  doubtless 
have  happened  in  many  passages  and  whole  chapters,  there 
would  thus  be  parts  of  which  God  could  not  be  said  to  be 
the  author,  as  He  would  have  had  no  part  except  a  general 
supervision  in  their  production.  This  the  definition  of  the 
Vatican  Council  forbids  to  assert. 

Again,  there  would  be  no  difference,  in  such  case,  between 
the  definitions  of  oecumenical  councils  and  of  the  Pope's 
*'ex  cathedra",  and  the  Holy  Scriptures ;  for  in  these  defin- 
itions there  is  the  negative  assistance  of  the  Holy  Ghost. 
But  we  know  that  the  dignity  and  rank  of  such  documents 
are  far  below  that  of  the  Holy  Writ ;  for  these  are  human 
docimients,  infallible  in  their  truth,  but  they  can  not  be 
said  to  have  God  for  their  author. 

In  1885  Dr.  Franciscus  Schmid,  complaining  that  no- 
where could  he  find  a  fitting  treatise  on  inspiration,  published 
at  Brixen  his  work  entitled:  "De  Inspirationis  Bibliorumvi 
et  ratione, "  a  volume  of  422  pages  in  octavo.  It  is  divided 
into  seven  books. 

In  the  first  book  Dr.  Schmid  expounds  the  common 
Catholic  doctrine,,  that  there  can  be  no  error  in  the  Scrip- 
tures ;  that  all  the  statements  of  Scripture  rest  on  the  testi- 
mony of  God  and  are  of  divine  authority.  The  reason  is 
that  the  Scriptures  being  written  by  the  inspiration  of  the 
Holy  Ghost  have  God  for  their  principal  Author,  who  em- 
ploys human  writers  as  instruments.  God  is  not  the  only 
Author,  because  he  did  not  immediately  produce  the  books 
by  miracle ;  but  he  wrote  them  by  means  of  men.  That  God 
writing  through  men,  be  the  true  Author,  an  assistance 
saving  from  error  is  not  enough,  neither  a  subsequent  appro- 
bation, for  neither  can  give  to  a  book  the  prerogative  of  a 
divine  origin.  There  is  necessary  therefore  a  positive  action 
of  God  on  the  man,  by  which  the  things  which  God  has  in 
mind  and  will  to  write,  the  (inspired)  man  also  conceives  in 
his  mind,  and  adequately  accomplishes.  Then  the  book  is 
to  be  given  to  men  as  divine.     The  intrinsic  and  principal 


SCHMID  107 

argument  is  drawn  from  this  that  God  is  the  Author  of  the 
sacred  books.  To  write  a  book,  or  to  be  a  book's  author, 
in  the  last  analysis,  means  nought  else  than  by  writings  to 
speak  to  the  readers ;  that  is,  to  express  in  writing  that  which 
one  thinks  in  the  mind,  that  they  who  read  may  know  from 
his  writings  the  writer's  thoughts.  But  if  God  did  not  by 
his  action  determine  all  things  that  were  to  be  written  he 
himself  would  not  have  spoken  these  things;  therefore  he 
would  not  be  the  Author  of  the  whole  book.  This  applies 
to  the  action  of  God  upon  the  understanding  of  the  inspired 
writer.  But  since  the  inspired  writer  is  an  instrument  of 
God,  it  is  required  that  he  write  not  merely  by  his  own  good 
pleasure,  but  in  the  name  of  God ;  consequently  there  is 
necessary  that  there  should  be  a  divine  action  on  the  will  of 
the  man  and  through  the  will  upon  his  executive  faculties. " 

''There  is  a  great  difference  between  an  inspired  book 
and  the  definitions  of  the  Church ;  for  an  inspired  book  is 
infallible  in  all  that  it  affirms ;  it  is  a  basic  fount  of  revelation ; 
besides  divine  assistance  it  requires  an  extraordinary  posi- 
tive action  of  God ;  that  it  should  be  written  in  the  name  of 
God,  and  as  God's  book  delivered  to  the  Church;  and  even 
for  the  words,  it  requires  a  special  assistance.  All  these 
qualities  are  not  found  in  the  definitions  of  the  Church. 
Nevertheless  the  labor  and  vigils  of  the  author  do  not  con- 
flict with  the  inspiration  of  a  book. " 

Regarding  verbal  inspiration  Schmid  speaks  as  follows: 
"  It  is  asked :  What  is  truly  required  that  a  book  be  formally 
called  the  word  of  God?  And,  to  particularize.  Is  it  required 
that  the  individual  words,  just  as  they  are, be  of  God?  We 
answer,  No.  But  it  is  not  the  same  to  deny  that  God  ante- 
cedently determined  and  inspired  in  the  writer  the  individual 
words,  as  to  say  that  God  left  to  the  inspired  writer  an  unre- 
stricted liberty  concerning  the  words  and  forms  of  expression. 
Rather  another  mode  of  inspiration  which  is  a  mean  between 
the  two  extremes  seems  possible.  In  other  words,  one  can 
grant  that  in  our  books  the  words  and  the  style  are  not 
determined  by  God  for  every  individual  part,  and  yet  main- 
tain that  the  whole  manner  of  speech  which  is  found  in  the 
Scripture,  is  in  a  certain  manner  antecedently  determined 


108  CRETS 

by  God,  and  by  God's  providence,  in  a  manner  known  to 
God,  brought  out  in  the  inspired  books  by  the  act  of  the 
inspired  writers." 

''  We  understand  that  God  brought  forth  the  Scriptures 
that  men  in  matters  of  faith  and  morals  might  have  a  book 
which  they  might  readily  and  safely  believe."  ^'Therefore 
all  things  whether  they  pertain  to  faith  or  morals  or  not, 
if  found  in  the  Scriptures,  should  have  divine  authority. 
Otherwise  confusion  and  doubt  will  shake  the  foundations 
of  faith.  Therefore,  there  is  no  limiting  the  inspiration  of 
the  things  affirmed  in  the  Bible,  and  the  words  of  Scripture 
must  be  such  that  they  adequately  express  God's  thought 
and  will. "  "And  God  assists  the  words  as  far  as  is  necessary 
for  this  end." 

In  1886,  G.  J.  Crets  of  the  order  of  the  Premonstratensians 
published  at  Louvain  "De  divina  Bibliorum  inspiratione." 
After  a  review  of  the  various  opinions,  he  institutes  an 
analysis  of  the  dogmatic  formula,  "God  is  the  Author  of  the 
Holy  Scripture;"  for  the  reason  that  nothing  conduces  more 
to  the  knowledge  of  the  true  concept  of  inspiration  than  to 
ascertain  what  is  required  on  the  part  of  God,  in  order  that 
God  writing  by  means  of  men  be  called  in  the  common  use 
of  the  term  the  Author  of  the  Scriptures.  Having  made  a 
distinction  between  the  material  and  formal  element  of  the 
book,  he  places  as  necessary  in  inspiration  that,  as  regards  the 
formal  element  of  the  book,  the  writer  receive  a  divine  af- 
flatus by  which  he  may  conceive  in  his  mind  and  be  in- 
fallibly moved  in  his  will  to  write  all  those  things,  and  only 
those  things,  which  the  Holy  Ghost  has  decreed  should  be 
written  by  him.  Moreover  there  is  required  a  certain  assist- 
ance or  some  direction  from  the  Holy  Ghost  that  the  writer 
be  saved  from  error  and  defect  in  executing  the  work  to 
which  he  is  divinely  moved.  By  this  assistance  Crets 
understands  a  divine  action  by  which  the  human  writer 
chooses  words  apt  to  express  the  thoughts  of  the  principal 
Author.  Crets  refutes  the  theory  which  made  inspiration  a 
mere  assistance,  and  he  also  rejects  the  theory  of  subsequent 
approbation.  In  the  things  which  the  inspired  writer  ac- 
quires by  his  own  faculties  Crets  teaches  that  God  moves 


CRETS  109 

his  will  by  a  special  action  to  write,  and  to  choose  the  things 
which  God  wishes  written,  and  supernaturally  enlightens 
him  to  know  what  to  write.  He  believes  that  it  is  prob- 
able that  all  the  inspired  writers  w^ere  conscious  of  their  in- 
spiration. 

Regarding  verbal  inspiration  Crets  declares:  "We  con- 
clude that  besides  the  inspiration  in  the  strict  sense  of  the 
words  and  sentences,  by  which  indeterminately  and  remotely 
the  words  and  form  of  expression  are  furnished,  there  is  not 
in  the  main  to  be  admitted  a  special  action  of  the  Holy 
Ghost  in  the  mode  of  expression,  except  the  special  direction 
and  assistance  by  which  the  mind  of  the  writer,  in  choosing 
forms  of  expression  characteristic  of  his  temperament  and 
education,  is  so  led  that  leaving  aside  incongruous  and  less 
exact  expressions,  he  employs  words  and  expressions  be- 
fitting the  inspired  thoughts,  by  which  the  divine  truths  may 
be  truthfully  and  fully  expressed  in  a  manner  befitting  the 
destination  of  the  books  to  all  the  generations  of  men." 

Crets  extends  inspiration  "to  all  the  statements  of  the 
Bible,  whether  they  be  of  faith  and  morals,  or  of  profane 
things;  whether  they  be  great  or  small;  for  if  any  error  be 
admitted  in  the  Scripture  its  whole  authority  is  shaken ;  and 
also  because  God  is  the  Author  of  the  whole  Scripture  with 
all  its  parts." 

Those  who  argue  against  this,  base  their  argument  on  the 
purpose  of  Scripture,  which  they  assert  to  be  not  profane 
but  religious. 

Crets  answers:  "The  adequate  and  the  ultimate  end 
intended  by  God  in  giving  us  the  Holy  Scriptures  was  not 
that  all  the  truth  pertaining  to  faith  and  morals  should  be 
systematically  condensed  into  certain  books,  and  thus  deliv- 
ered to  us ;  or  that  in  books  partly  written  by  purely  human 
agency,  portions  written  by  their  authors  while  under  divine 
inspiration  should  be  interspersed;  but  (the  end  was)  that 
in  things  pertaining  to  faith  and  morals,  for  our  present 
life  and  our  eternal  life  in  Heaven,  we  should  be  taught  by 
means  of  books  having  divine  authority  for  each  and  every 
statement ;  in  which  books  the  truths  at  times  are  presented 
in  a  familiar  form ;  as,  for  instance,  in  the  form  of  historical 


110  ZANECCHIA 

accoiints,  narrations  and  letters ;  all  which  not  only  contain 
things  strictly  religious,  but  also  profane  matter,  which 
however  either  from  the  nature  of  the  thing  or  from  the  in- 
tention of  God,  has  a  proximate  or  remote  relation  to  the 
religious  truths.  Therefore  the  things  essentially  religious 
by  the  primary  intention  of  God  are  for  their  own  sake 
inspired ;  the  other  matter  is  the  word  of  God,  written  by  the 
divine  influx,  though  accessorily,  and  for  their  relation  to  the 
things  of  faith  and  morals." 

Crets  affirms  that  in  things  of  the  physical  order  the  sacred 
writers  spoke  according  to  the  popular  conception  of  these 
things,  based  on  the  appearances  of  things.  Also  in  indicat- 
ing numbers  or  time  the  writers  at  times  expressed  a  certain 
indetermination  as  the  matter  demanded.  By  this  most 
ex.cellent  theory  all  that  is  in  the  Scripture  is  inspired,  but 
must  be  properly  interpreted  according  to  the  principles 
approved  by  the  Church. 

In  1899  3-t  Rome,  Zanecchia  O.  P.  published  his  work 
on  inspiration.  This  contains  little  that  is  new,  and  its  chief 
feature  was  an  unreasonable  attack  on  Card.  Franzelin's 
theory  of  inspiration.  Zanecchia  was  ably  answered  by  Fr.  J. 
P.  van  Kasteren,  S.  J.,  of  Utrecht  in  the  periodical  ''Studien." 
Utrecht  1902.  Zanecchia  answered  in  a  work  entitled 
"Scriptor  sacer  sub  divina  inspiratione  juxta  sententiam 
Card.  Franzelin",  published  at  Rome  in  1903. 

The  main  point  urged  against  Franzelin  is  that  he  made 
the  formula  "God  is  the  Author  of  the  Scriptures"  the 
fundamental  first  principle  in  investigating  the  nature  of 
inspiration.  Zanecchia,  Prat  and  Lagrange  argue  that  the 
term  author  is  ambiguous  and  can  not  be  made  the  basis  of 
the  clear  concept  of  inspiration.  It  appears  that  there  is 
much  sophistry  in  the  opposition  to  Franzelin.  The  word 
author  has,  it  is  true,  several  meanings  as  guarantee,  cause, 
writer,  etc. ;  but  as  used  by  the  Councils  of  the  Church,  the 
sense  in  which  it  is  employed  in  the  conciliar  formula  is 
made  clear  by  the  setting,  and  it  is  evident  that  it  means  to 
predicate  of  God  the  divine  Authorship  of  the  Holy  Books. 

They  say  that  the  term  "author"  does  not  contain  the 
term  "inspirer"  no  more  than  the  term  "animal"  contains 


ZANECCHIA  111 

of  necessity  the  concept  "man".  Therefore,  they  say  that 
it  is  not  logical  to  prove  God's  inspiration  from  his  author- 
ship. But  here  again  there  is  sophistry.  The  term  **  author" 
generically  considered  does  not  contain  the  concept  of  inspira- 
tion; but  the  concept  "author"  as  used  by  the  councils  and 
as  used  by  Franzelin  clearly  contains  the  concept  "  inspirer. " 
While  the  concept  "inspirer"  is  ontologically  prior  to  the 
concept  "author",  in  the  order  of  our  cognition  the  concept 
of  authorship  is  the  clearer ;  and  we  understand  the  essential 
elements  of  inspiration  from  authorship.  Therefore,  we 
believe  that  Billot's  remark  is  k  propos:  "The  new  critics 
seem  to  themselves  to  have  brought  forth  a  great  apparatus 
of  learning  (against  Franzelin) ;  but  in  vain,  for  it  would  seem 
that  it  is  their  own  logic,  and  not  the  logic  of  Card.  Franzelin 
that  is  defective."  (De  inspiratione,  25.) 

At  this  point  it  is  well  to  insert  the  eminent  author 
Christian  Pesch's  note  on  the  controversy:  "Although  it  is 
scarcely  necessary,.  I  acknowledge  that  I  have  never  con- 
sidered Card.  Franzelin's  theory  definitive ;  nay  more,  there 
are  many  things  in  it  which  I  do  not  approve.  The* under- 
standing of  the  dogma  of  inspiration,  not  less  than  that  of 
the  other  dogmas,  continually  develops  in  the  Church ;  nor 
can  any  man  in  this  life  formulate  an  immutable  theory, 
beyond  which  progress  will  not  be  possible.  God's 
providence  so  governs  human  affairs  that  there  is  never 
closed  the  way  to  the  knowledge  of  truth  and  the  love  of 
good.  But  that  Zanecchia  never  wearies  of  repeating  that 
the  theory  of  Franzelin  is  absurd,  obscure,  unreasonable, 
arbitrary;  that  (Franzelin's)  method  is  unreasonable,  false, 
illogical,  and  such  like,  serves  indeed  to  show  us  the  charac- 
ter of  the  mind  of  the  one  who  writes  such  things,  but  will 
avail  nothing  with  wise  men  to  overthrow  Franzelin's 
doctrine."  (De  insp.  sac.  script,  p.  313,  note.) 

Holden,  the  English  professor  at  the  Sorbonne  (f  1662), 
was  the  first  among  Catholics  to  distinguish  between  the 
doctrinal  parts  of  Scripture,  which,  he  asserted,  were  to  be 
believed  fide  divina,  and  the  historical  and  other  parts, 
which  he  held  to  be  written  without  any  special  influence  of 
the  Holy  Ghost.     Thus  in  his  Analysis  of  Faith,  V. :     "  The 


112  LIBERAL   OPINIONS 

Special  divine  assistance  given  to  the  author  of  whatever 
book  the  Church  receives  as  the  word  of  God,  extends  only 
to  those  things  which  are  doctrinal,  or  have  a  proximate  or 
necessary  bearing  on  doctrine;  but,  in  these  things  which 
are  not  of  the  primary  intent  of  the  writer,  or  are  relating 
to  other  things,  we  believe  him  to  have  received  from  God 
only  that  assistance  which  is  common  to  other  pious 
writers" ;  and,  II.  3  :  "Although  it  is  not  licit  to  impeach  as 
false  aught  contained  in  the  Holy  Code,  nevertheless,  the 
things  which  do  not  relate  to  religion  do  not  constitute 
articles  of  Catholic  faith."  Holden's  doctrine  was  examined 
by  the  Sorbonne  and  condemned. 

Richard  Simon  in  his  "Histoire  Critique  du  Nouveau 
Testament"  (Rotterdam,  1689)  declares  that  he  dares  not 
condemn  the  opinion  of  Holden ;  and  dares  not  approve  it 
in  all  its  parts.  Simon  himself  delivers  his  opinion  obscurely, 
but  seems  content  with  a  negative  assistance  preserving 
from  error.  Thus  in  his  R^ponse  aux  Sentiments  de  quel- 
ques  Th^ologiens  de  Hollande,  he  asserts :  "Therefore  when 
the  Gospels  are  said  to  be  inspired,  this  is  not  to  be  under- 
stood in  the  rigor  that  all  things  in  these  books  came  im- 
mediately from  the  Holy  Ghost ;  but  the  sense  is  that  God 
so  controlled  their  writers  that  they  fell  not  into  error. 
Men  wrote,  and  the  Holy  Ghost  directed  them,  and  did  not 
deprive  them  of  reason  or  memory,  that  he  might  inspire 
things  which  they  already  knew;  but  in  general  he  deter- 
mined them  to  write  certain  things  rather  than  other  things 
which  they  knew  equally  well. " 

Chrismann,in  his  ''Rule  of  Faith"  went  farther.  He  de- 
clares that  while  all  things  in  Scripture  are  true,  only  the 
truths  of  faith  and  morals  are  to  be  believed  with  divine 
faith:  ''Those  things  which  neither  antecedently  or  in  the 
actual  writing  were  revealed  are  not  to  be  believed  with 
divine  faith,  .  .  as  for  instance  that  Pilate  was  prefect 
of  Judaea  when  Christ  was  crucified;  or  that  statement  of 
Paul,  II.  Tim.  IV. :  *  Only  Luke  is  with  me, '  and  many  other 
things  which  merit  not  divine  faith  but  only  Catholic  faith. 
In  these  things  that  inspiration  suffices  by  which  the  Holy 
Ghost  assisted  the  writers  that  they  might  not  err. " 


THE   VATICAN   COUNCIL  113 

Some  other  obscure  theologians  both  before  and  after 
Chrismann  held  these  opinions.  It  was  therefore  to  eradicate 
these  errors  that  the  Vatican  Council  promulgated  its  decree : 
"Qui  quidem  veteris  et  novi  Testamenti  libri  integri  cum 
omnibus  suis  partibus,  prout  in  ejusdem  Concilii  decreto 
recensentur,  et  in  veteri  vulgata  latina  editione  habentur, 
pro  sacris  et  canonicis  suscipiendi  sunt.  Eos  vero  Ecclesia 
pro  sacris  et  canonicis  habet,  non  ideo  quod  sola  humana 
industria  concinnati,  sua  deinde  auctoritate  sint  approbati; 
nee  ideo  dumtaxat,  quod  revelationem  sine  errore  contin- 
eant ;  sed  propterea  quod  Spiritu  Sancto  inspirante  conscripti 
Deum  habent  auctorem,  at  que  ut  tales  ipsi  Ecclesiae  traditi 
sunt.  "(Cap.  IL  De  Revel.)  And  in  Canon  IV.  De  Revela- 
tione  : 

''Si  quis  sacrae  Scripturae  libros  integros  cum  omnibus 
suis  partibus,  prout  illos  sancta  Tridentina  Synodus  recensuit, 
pro  sacris  et  canonicis  non  susceperit,  aut  eos  divinitus 
inspiratos  esse  negaverit ;  anathema  sit." 

One  of  the  bishops  in  the  Council  proposed  an  emendation 
to  the  decree  for  the  reason  that  it  is  not  the  same  to  declare 
a  book  sacred  as  to  declare  it  canonical.  A  book  is  sacred 
by  inspiration;  it  is  canonical  by  the  approbation  of  the 
Church.  Bishop  Gasser  ably  answered  that  though  the  two 
terms,  etymologically  differed,  in  the  concrete  they  were 
identical,  for  the  books  of  the  canon  were  both  sacred  and 
canonical.  Canonicity  does  not  pertain  to  the  essence  of  in- 
spiration but  to  its  manifestation.  The  Council  first  de- 
clared the  intrinsic  character  of  inspiration,  and  then  the 
external  condition,  that  it  be  delivered  to  the  Church  as  a 
divine  book.  Soon  after  the  Vatican  Council  August  Roh- 
ling  published  in  Germany  a  treatise  "De  Bibliorum  inspira- 
tione  ejusque  valore  ac  vi  pro  libera  scientia."  Rohling 
distinguished  between  things  of  faith  and  morals,  and  pro- 
fane things.  In  things  of  faith  and  morals  the  human 
writer  was  preserved  from  error  by  inspiration.  In  all 
things  profane  the  wTiter  was  left  to  his  own  resources,  and 
hence  what  he  wrote  was  to  be  treated  as  the  work  of  any 
uninspired  historian.  To  distinguish  between  inspired  and 
uninspired  accessory  matter,  Rohling  gave  the  criterion  that 


114  F.    LENORMANT 

such  matter  was  inspired  only  when  it  bore  a  necessary  re- 
lation to  religious  truth,  as  for  instance  that  Israel  came  to 
Mt.  Sinai.  This  theory  was  ably  refuted  by  Franzelin,  "De 
Trad,  et  Script."  pag.  564  sqq.  Rohling's  theory  rests  on 
a  false  principle  that  God  inspires  only  a  part  of  the  Scrip- 
tures, whereas  the  Councils  of  the  Church  declare  that  they 
are  all  inspired  with  all  their  parts.  The  profane  matter  is 
inspired  per  accidens,  that  men  might  have  a  deposit  of  writ- 
ings of  infallible  truth. 

A  far  greater  impetus  was  given  to  the  tendency  to  limit 
inspiration  by  the  work  of  the  French  orientalist,  F.  Lenor- 
mant.  In  his  work,  "Les  Origines  de  I'histoire,"  1880,  he 
declares  that  all  the  Scripture  is  inspired,  but  all  that  is  in- 
spired is  not  infallibly  true.  In  faith  and  morals  the  Scrip- 
ture is  an  infallible  guide,  but  this  infallibility  is  not  to  be 
extended  to  other  matters.  The  first  eleven  chapters  of 
Genesis  are  myths  serving  to  present  religious  ideas,  but 
in  the  history  the  fabulous  is  inseparably  intermingled. 
Lenormant  speaks  with  great  clearness.  Of  inspiration  he 
says:  '*In  regard  to  biblical  questions  one  of  which  is  here 
treated,  I  firmly  believe  the  divine  inspiration  of  the  sacred 
books,  and  with  perfect  submission  I  accept  the  doctrinal 
decisions  of  the  Church  pertaining  to  inspiration,  but  I 
know  that  in  these  decisions  inspiration  is  not  extended 
beyond  the  things  which  relate  to  religion  and  the  things  of 
faith  and  morals,  that  is  the  supernatural  teaching  contained 
in  the  Scriptures.  In  other  things  the  human  faculties  of 
the  biblical  writers  is  supreme.  Everyone  impressed  his 
character  on  the  style  of  his  book.  Regarding  physical 
sciences,  the  writers  had  no  special  light ;  they  followed  the 
common  opinions  and  prejudices  of  their  times.  The  end  of 
Scripture  is,'  says  Cardinal  Baronius,  'to  teach  us  how  to  go 
to  Heaven;  not  how  the  heavens  move' ;  much  less  is  it  the 
end  of  Scripture  to  reveal  how  earthly  things  move  through 
their  changes.  The  Holy  Ghost  did  not  reveal  scientific 
truths  nor  universal  history."  Applying  his  theory  to 
Genesis  he  believes  that  in  its  first  chapters  it  is  a  collection 
of  myths  and  traditions  common  to  all  the  peoples  inhabiting 
about  the  Euphrates  and  Tigris.     Under  the  influence  of  the 


CARD.    NEWMAN  115 

religion  of  Israel  the  polytheistic  element  has  been  elimi- 
nated from  these  traditions,  and  they  became  the  instrument 
of  conveying  the  high  truths  of  the  monotheistic  religion  of 
Israel.  Lenormant  differs  from  other  non-Catholic  orient- 
alists. These  assign  an  evolution  of  human  conscience  as  the 
cause  of  a  transition  from  the  crude  beliefs  of  polytheism  to 
the  more  elevated  character  of  monotheism  in  Israel.  Le- 
normant invokes  a  special  intervention  of  divine  Providence 
inspiring  the  Law  and  the  Prophets.  Lenormant 's  work 
was  placed  on  the  Index  by  a  decree  of  Dec.  19,  1887. 

The  theory  of  Lenormant  was  plainly  contrary  to  the 
Catholic  idea  of  the  total  inspiration  of  the  Bible.  It  would 
no  longer  be  a  book  of  inspired  truths,  but  a  book  in  which 
inspired  truths  were  intermingled  with  myth  and  fable. 
Many  Catholic  writers  took  up  the  defence  of  the  Bible 
against  Lenormant.  Notable  among  these  were  Lefebre 
(Revue  Catholique  de  Louvain,  1880)  Desjacques,  Lamy,  and 
Brucker  (La  Controverse  1881,  1882).  Franz  von  Himi- 
melauer  (Stimmen  aus  Maria-Laach,  1881)  pointed  out  the 
danger  of  Lenormant 's  theories,  declaring:  ''Er  riickt  sich 
mit  Sack  und  Pack  in  die  Linie  der  rationalistischen  Er- 
klarer  ein. " 

Tentatively  and  cautiously  Card.  Newman  advanced 
some  views  on  inspiration  in  an  article  '*  On  The  Inspira- 
tion of  Scripture"  published  in  the  Nineteenth  Century, 
LXXXIV.  Feb.  1884.  In  this  article,  inspiration  and  allied 
topics  are  studied.  Card.  Newman  wrote  his  article  to 
put  the  Church  in  a  true  light  against  the  calumnies  of 
Renan.  The  latter  argued  that  the  Catholic  Church  in- 
sisted on  certain  things  which  criticism  and  history  proved 
to  be  impossible.  Newman  takes  up  to  consider  whether 
the  Church  does  insist  on  matters  in  defiance  of  criticism 
and  history.  Hence,  rather  than  the  formulation  of  a  theory 
of  inspiration  the  great  cardinal  presents  his  view  of  what 
the  Church  insists  on.     Of  inspiration  he  says : 

"  Now  then,  the  main  question  before  us  being  what  it  is 
that  a  Catholic  is  free  to  hold  about  Scripture  in  general,  or 
about  its  separate  portions  or  its  statements,  without  com- 
promising his  firm  inward  assent  to  the  dogmas  of  the  Church, 


116  CARD.    NEWMAN 

that  is,  to  the  de  fide  enunciations  of  Pope  and  Councils,  we 
have  first  of  all  to  inquire  how  many  and  what  those  dogmas 
are. " 

"  I  answer  that  there  are  two  dogmas;  one  relates  to  the 
authority  of  Scripture,  the  other  to  its  interpretation. 
As  to  the  authority  of  Scripture,  we  hold  it  to  be,  in  all 
matters  of  faith  and  morals,  divinely  inspired  throughout; 
as  to  its  interpretation,  we  hold  that  the  Church  is,  in  faith 
and  morals,  the  one  infallible  expounder  of  that  inspired 
text. 

'^  I  begin  with  the  question  of  its  inspiration. 

"The  books  which  constitute  the  canon  of  Scripture,  or 
the  Canonical  books,  are  eniimerated  by  the  Tridentine 
Council,  as  we  find  them  in  the  first  page  of  our  Catholic 
Bibles,  and  are  in  that  Ecumenical  Council's  decree  spoken 
of  by  implication  as  the  work  of  inspired  men.  The  Vatican 
Council  speaks  more  distinctly,  saying  that  the  entire  books 
with  all  their  parts,  are  divinely  inspired,  and  adding  an 
anathema  upon  impugners  of  this  definition. 

"There  is  another  dogmatic  phrase  used  by  the  Councils 
of  Florence  and  Trent  to  denote  the  inspiration  of  Scripture, 
viz.,  *  Deus  unus  et  idem  utriusque  Testamenti  Auctor. ' 
Since  this  left  room  for  holding  that  by  the  word  '  Testa- 
mentum'  was  meant  'Dispensation,'  as  it  seems  to  have 
meant  in  former  Councils  from  the  date  of  Irenseus,  and 
as  St.  Paul  uses  the  word,  in  his  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews, 
the  Vatican  Council  has  expressly  defined  that  the  concrete 
libri  themselves  of  the  Old  and  New  Testament  'Deum 
habent  Auctorem. ' 

"There  is  a  further  question,  which  is  still  left  in  some 
ambiguity,  the  meaning  of  the  word  *  Auctor. '  'Auctor ' 
is  not  identical  with  the  English  word  '  Author. '  Allowing 
that  there  are  instances  to  be  found  in  classical  Latin  in 
which  '  auctores '  may  be  translated  '  authors, '  instances  in 
which  it  even  seems  to  mean  '  writers, '  it  more  naturally 
means  'authorities.'  Its  proper  sense  is  'originator,' 
'inventor,'  'founder,'  'primary  cause;'  (thus  St.  Paul 
speaks  of  our  Lord  as  'Auctor  salutis,'  'Auctor  fidei;')  on 
the  other  hand,  that  it  was  inspired  penmen  who  were  the 


CARD.    NEWMAN  117 

*  writers '  of  their  works  seems  asserted  by  St.  John  and  St. 
Luke  and,  I  may  say,  in  every  paragraph  of  St.  Paul's 
Epistles.  In  St.  John  we  read,  'This  is  the  disciple  who 
testifies  of  these  things,  and  has  written  these  things, '  and 
St.  Luke  says, '  I  have  thought  it  good  to  write  to  thee'&c. 
However,  if  any  one  prefers  to  construe  'auctor'  as  'author ' 
or  writer,  let  it  be  so— only,  then  there  will  be  two  writers  of 
the  Scriptures,  the  divine  and  the  human. 

"And  now  comes  the  important  question,  in  what  re- 
spect are  the  Canonical  books  inspired?  It  cannot  be  in 
in  every  respect,  unless  we  are  bound  de  fide  to  believe  that 
'terra  in  setemum  stat',  and  that  heaven  is  above  us,  and 
that  there  are  no  antipodes.  And  it  seems  unworthy  of 
Divine  Greatness,  that  the  Almighty  should  in  His  revela- 
tion of  Himself  to  us  undertake  mere  secular  duties,  and 
assume  the  office  of  a  narrator,  as  such,  or  an  historian,  or 
geographer,  except  so  far  as  the  secular  matters  bear  directly 
upon  the  revealed  truth.  The  Councils  of  Trent  and  the 
Vatican  fulfil  this  anticipation ;  they  tell  us  distinctly  the 
object  and  the  promise  of  Scripture  inspiration.  They 
specify  'faith  and  moral  conduct '  as  the  drift  of  that  teach- 
ing which  has  the  guarantee  of  inspiration.  What  we  need 
and  what  is  given  us  is  not  how  to  educate  ourselves  for  this 
life ;  we  have  abundant  natural  gifts  for  himian  society,  and 
for  the  advantages  which  it  secures ;  but  our  great  want  is 
how  to  demean  ourselves  in  thought  and  deed  towards  our 
Maker,  and  how  to  gain  reliable  information  on  this  urgent 
necessity. 

"Accordingly  four  times  does  the  Tridentine  Council 
insist  upon  'faith  and  morality,'  as  the  scope  of  inspired 
teaching.  It  declares  that  the  'Gospel'  is  'the  Fount  of  all 
saving  truth  and  all  instruction  in  morals, '  that  in  the  written 
books  and  in  the  unwritten  traditions,  the  Holy  Spirit 
dictating,  this  truth  and  instruction  are  contained.  Then  it 
speaks  of  the  books  and  traditions,  'relating  whether  to 
faith  or  to  morals,'  and  afterwards  of  'the  confirmation  of 
dogmas  and  establishment  of  morals. '  Lastly,  it  warns  the 
Christian  people,  'in  matters  of  faith  and  morals,'  against 
distorting  Scripture  into  a  sense  of  their  own. 


118  CARD.    NEWMAN 

^'In  like  manner  the  Vatican  Council  pronounces  that 
Supernatural  Revelation  consists  'in  rebus  divinis/  and  is 
contained  'in  libris  scriptis  et  sine  scripto  traditionibus ; ' 
and  it  also  speaks  of  '  petulantia  ingenia '  advancing  wrong 
interpretations  of  Scripture  'in  rebus  fidei  et  morum  ad 
aedificationem  doctrincE  Christianae  pertinentium. ' 

^'But  while  the  Councils,  as  have  been  shown,  lays  down 
so  emphatically  the  inspiration  of  Scripture  in  respect  to  faith 
and  morals,  it  is  remarkable  that  they  do  not  say  a  word 
directly  as  to  inspiration  in  matters  of  fact.  Yet  are  we 
therefore  to  conclude  that  the  record  of  facts  in  Scripture 
does  not  come  under  the  guarantee  of  its  inspiration?  We 
are  not  so  to  conclude,  and  for  this  plain  reason : — the  sacred 
narrative  carried  on  through  so  many  ages,  what  is  it  but  the 
very  matter  for  our  faith  and  rule  of  our  obedience  ?  What 
but  that  narrative  itself  is  the  supernatural  teaching,  in  order 
to  which  inspiration  is  given?  What  is  the  whole  history, 
traced  out  in  Scripture  from  Genesis  to  Esdras  and  thence  on 
to  the  end  of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  but  a  manifestation  of 
Divine  Providence,  on  the  one  hand  interpretative,  on  a 
large  scale  and  with  analogical  applications,  of  universal 
history,  and  on  the  other  preparatory,  typical  and  predictive, 
of  the  Evangelical  Dispensation?  Its  pages  breathe  of 
providence  and  grace,  of  our  Lord,  and  of  His  work  and 
teaching,  from  beginning  to  end.  It  views  facts  in  those 
relations  in  which  neither  ancients,  such  as  the  Greek  and 
Latin  classical  historians,  nor  modems,  such  as  Niebuhr, 
Grote,  Ewald,  or  Michelet,  can  view  them.  In  this  point 
of  view  it  has  God  for  its  author,  even  though  the  finger  of 
God  traced  no  words  but  the  Decalogue.  Such  is  the  claim 
of  Bible  history  in  its  substantial  fulness  to  be  accepted 
de  fide  as  true.  In  this  point  of  view,  Scripture  is  inspired, 
not  only  in  faith  and  morals,  but  in  all  its  parts  which  bear 
on  faith,  including  matters  of  fact. 

''But  what  has  been  said  leads  to  another  serious  question. 
It  is  easy  to  imagine  a  Code  of  Laws  inspired,  or  a  formal 
prophecy,  or  a  Hymn,  or  a  Creed,  or  a  collection  of  proverbs. 
Such  works  may  be  short,  precise,  and  homogeneous ;  but 
inspiration  on  the  one  hand,  and  on  the  other  a  document, 


CARD.    NEWMAN  119 

multiform  and  copious  in  its  contents,  as  the  Bible  is,  are  at 
first  sight  incompatible  ideas,  and  destructive  of  each  other. 
How  are  we  practically  to  combine  the  indubitable  fact  of  a 
divine  superintendence  with  the  indubitable  fact  of  a  col- 
lection of  such  various  writings. 

''Surely,  then,  if  the  revelations  and  lessons  in  Scripture 
are  addressed  to  us  personally  and  practically,  the  presence 
among  us  of  a  formal  judge  and  standing  expositor  of  its 
words  is  imperative.  It  is  antecedently  unreasonable  to 
suppose  that  a  book  so  complex,  so  systematic,  in  parts  so 
obscure,  the  outcome  of  so  many  minds,  times,  and  places 
should  be  given  us  from  God  without  the  safeguard  of  some 
authority ;  as  if  it  could  possibly,  from  the  nature  of  the  case, 
interpret  itself.  Its  inspiration  does  but  guarantee  its  truth, 
not  its  interpretation.  How  are  private  readers  satisfactorily 
to  distinguish  what  is  didactic  and  what  is  historical,  what 
is  fact  and  what  is  vision,  what  is  allegorical  and  what  is 
literal,  what  is  idiomatic  and  what  is  grammatical,  what  is 
enunciated  formally  and  what  occurs  obiter,  what  is  only  of 
temporary  and  what  is  of  lasting  obligation?  Such  is  our 
natural  anticipation,  and  it  is  only  too  exactly  justified  in 
the  events  of  the  last  three  centuries,  in  the  many  countries 
where  private  judgment  on  the  text  of  Scripture  has  pre- 
vailed. The  gift  of  inspiration  requires  as  its  complement 
the  gift  of  infallibility. 

''Where  then  is  this  gift  lodged,  which  is  so  necessary  for 
the  due  use  of  the  written  word  of  God?  Thus  we  are  intro- 
duced to  the  second  dogma  in  respect  to  Holy  Scripture 
taught  by  the  Catholic  religion.  The  first  is  that  Scripture 
is  inspired,  the  second  that  the  Church  is  the  infallible 
interpreter  of  that  inspiration." 

"Such  then  is  the  answer  which  I  make  to  the  main 
question  which  has  led  to  my  writing.  I  asked  what  obliga- 
tion of  duty  lay  upon  the  Catholic  scholar  or  man  of  science 
as  regards  his  critical  treatment  of  the  text  and  the  matter 
of  Holy  Scripture.  And  now  I  say  that  it  is  his  duty,  first, 
never  to  forget  that  what  he  is  handling  is  the  Word  of  God, 
which,  by  reason  of  the  difficulty  of  always  drawing  the  line 
between  what  is  human  and  what  is  divine,  cannot  be  put  on 


120  CARD.    NEWMAN 

the  level  of  other  books,  as  it  is  now  the  fashion  to  do,  but 
has  the  nature  of  a  Sacrament,  which  is  outward  and  inward 
and  a  channel  of  supernatural  grace;  and  secondly,  that 
in  what  he  writes  upon  it  or  its  separate  books,  he  is  bound 
to  submit  himself  internally,  and  to  profess  to  submit  him- 
self, in  all  that  relates  to  faith  and  morals,  to  the  definite 
teachings  of  Holy  Church. 

"This  being  laid  down,  let  me  go  on  to  consider  some  of 
the  critical  distinctions  and  conclusions  which  are  consistent 
with  a  faithful  observance  of  these  obligations. 

''Are  the  books  or  are  the  writers  inspired?  I  answer, 
Both.  The  Council  of  Trent  says  the  writers  Cab  ipsis 
Apostolis,  Spiritu  Sancto  dictante') ;  the  Vatican  says  the 
books  Csi  quis  libros  integros  &c.  divinitus  inspiratos  esse 
negaverit,  anathema  sit').  Of  course  the  Vatican  decision 
is  de  fide,  but  it  cannot  annul  the  Tridentine.  Both  decrees 
are  dogmatic  truths.  The  Tridentine  teaches  us  that  the 
Divine  Inspirer,  inasmuch  as  he  acted  on  the  writer,  acted, 
not  immediately  on  the  books  themselves,  but  through  the 
men  who  wrote  them.  The  books  are  inspired,  because 
the  writers  were  inspired  to  write  them.  They  are  not 
inspired  books,  unless  they  came  from  inspired  men. 

''There  is  one  instance  in  Scripture  of  Divine  Inspiration 
without  a  human  mediimi;  the  Decalogue  was  written  by 
the  very  finger  of  God.  He  wrote  the  law  upon  the  stone 
tables  Himself.  It  has  been  thought  the  Urim  and  Thum- 
mim  was  another  instance  of  the  immediate  inspiration  of  a 
material  substance;  but  anyhow  such  instances  are  excep- 
tional ;  certainly,  as  regards  Scripture,  which  alone  concerns 
us  here,  there  always  have  been  two  minds  in  the  process  of 
inspiration,  a  Divine  Auctor,  and  a  human  Scriptor ;  and 
various  important  consequences  follow  from  this  appoint- 
ment. 

"  If  there  be  at  once  a  divine  and  a  human  mind  co- 
operating in  the  formation  of  the  sacred  text,  it  is  not  sur- 
prising if  there  often  be  a  double  sense  in  that  text,  and, 
with  obvious  exceptions,  never  certain  that  there  is  not. 

"Thus  Sara  had  her  htmian  and  literal  meaning  in  her 
words,  '  Cast  out  the  bondwoman  and  her  son, '  &c. ;  but  we 


CARD.    NEWMAN  121 

know  from  St.  Paul  that  those  words  were  inspired  by  the 
Holy  Ghost  to  convey  a  spiritual  meaning.  Abraham,  too, 
on  the  Mount,  when  his  son  asked  him  whence  was  to  come 
the  victim  for  the  sacrifice  w^hich  his  father  was  about  to 
offer,  answered  'God  will  provide;'  and  he  showed  his  own 
sense  of  his  words  afterwards,  when  he  took  the  ram  which 
was  caught  in  the  briers,  and  offered  it  as  a  holocaust.  Yet 
those  words  were  a  solemn  prophecy. 

''And  is  it  extravagant  to  say,  that,  even  in  the  case  of 
men  who  have  no  pretension  to  be  prophets  or  servants  of 
God,  He  may  by  their  means  give  us  great  maxims  and  les- 
sons, which  the  speakers  little  thought  they  were  delivering? 
as  in  the  case  of  the  Architriclinus  in  the  marriage  feast,  who 
spoke  of  the  bridegroom  as  having  'kept  the  good  wine  until 
now;'  words  which  it  was  needless  for  St.  John  to  record, 
imless  they  had  a  mystical  meaning. 

**  Such  instances  raise  the  question  whether  the  Scripture 
saints  and  prophets  always  understood  the  higher  and  divine 
sense  of  their  words.  As  to  Abraham,  this  will  be  answered 
in  the  affirmative ;  but  I  do  not  see  reason  for  thinking  that 
Sara  was  equally  favoured.  Nor  is  her  case  solitary ;  Caiphas 
as  high  priest,  spoke  a  divine  truth  by  virtue  of  his  office, 
little  thinking  of  it,  when  he  said  that '  one  man  must  die  for 
the  people;'  and  St.  Peter  at  Joppa  at  first  did  not  see 
beyond  a  literal  sense  in  his  vision,  though  he  knew  that 
there  was  a  higher  sense,  which  in  God's  good  time  would 
be  revealed  to  him. 

*'And  hence  there  is  no  difficulty  in  supposing  that  the 
Prophet  Osee,  though  inspired,  only  knew  his  own  literal 
sense  of  the  words  which  he  transmitted  to  posterity,  'I  have 
called  my  Son  out  of  Egypt, '  the  further  prophetic  meaning 
of  them  being  declared  by  St.  Matthew  in  his  gospel.  And 
such  a  divine  sense  would  be  both  concurrent  with  and  con- 
firmed by  that  antecedent  belief  which  prevailed  among  the 
Jews  in  St.  Matthew's  time,  that  their  sacred  books  were 
in  great  measure  typical,  with  an  evangelical  bearing,  though 
as  yet  they  might  not  know  what  those  books  contained  in 
prospect. 


122  CARD.    NEWMAN 

"  Nor  is  it  de  -fide  (for  that  alone  with  a  view  to  Catholic 
Biblicists  I  am  considering)  that  inspired  men,  at  the  time 
when  they  speak  from  inspiration,  should  always  know  that 
the  Divine  Spirit  is  visiting  them. 

''The  Psalms  are  inspired;  but,  when  David,  in  the  out- 
pouring of  his  deep  contrition,  disburdened  himself  before 
his  God  in  the  words  of  the  Miserere,  could  he,  possibly, 
while  uttering  them,  have  been  directly  conscious  that  every 
word  he  uttered  was  not  simply  his,  but  another's?  Did  he 
not  think  that  he  was  personally  asking  forgiveness  and 
spiritual  help  ? 

"  Doubt  again  seems  incompatible  with  a  consciousness 
of  being  inspired.  But  Father  Patrizi,  while  reconciling 
two  Evangelists  in  a  passage  of  their  narratives,  says,  if  I 
understand  him  rightly  (ii.  p.  405),  that  though  we  admit 
that  there  were  some  things  about  which  inspired  writers 
doubted,  this  does  not  imply  that  inspiration  allowed  them 
to  state  what  is  doubtful  as  certain,  but  only  it  did  not 
hinder  them  from  stating  things  with  a  doubt  in  their  minds 
about  them ;  but  how  can  the  All -knowing  Spirit  doubt  ? 
or  how  can  an  inspired  man  doubt,  if  he  is  conscious  of  his 
inspiration  ? 

"  And  again,  how  can  a  man  whose  hand  is  guided  by  the 
Holy  Spirit,  and  who  knows  it,  make  apologies  for  his  style 
of  writing,  as  if  deficient  in  literary  exactness  and  finish? 
If  then  the  writer  of  Ecclesiasticus,  at  the  very  time  that  he 
wrote  his  Prologue,  was  not  only  inspired  but  conscious  of 
his  inspiration,  how  could  he  have  entreated  his  readers  to 
'  come  with  benevolence, '  and  to  make  excuse  for  his  '  com- 
ing short  in  the  composition  of  words'?  Surely,  if  at  the 
very  time  he  wrote  he  had  known  it,  he  would,  like  other 
inspired  men,  have  said,  '  Thus  saith  the  Lord, '  or  what  was 
equivalent  to  it. 

"The  same  remark  applies  to  the  writer  of  the  second 
book  of  Machabees,  who  ends  his  narrative  by  saying,  '  If  I 
have  done  well,  it  is  what  I  desired,  but  if  not  so  perfectly, 
it  must  be  pardoned  me.'  What  a  contrast  to  St.  Paul, 
who,  speaking  of  his  inspiration  (I  Cor.  VII.  40)  and  of  his 
'weakness  and  fear'  {ibid.  II.  4),  does  so  in  order  to  hoast  that 


CARD.    NEWMAN  123 

his  'speech  was,  not  in  the  persuasive  words  of  human  wis- 
dom, but  in  the  showing  of  the  Spirit  and  of  power. '  The 
historian  of  the  Machabees,  would  have  surely  adopted  a 
like  tone  of  'glorying, '  had  he  had  at  the  time  a  like  con- 
sciousness of  his  divine  gift. 

"Again,  it  follows  from  there  being  two  agencies,  divine 
grace  and  human  intelligence,  co-operating  in  the  production 
of  the  Scriptures,  that,  whereas,  if  they  were  written,  as  in 
the  Decalogue,  by  the  immediate  finger  of  God,  every  word 
of  them  must  be  His  and  His  only;  on  the  contrary,  if  they 
are  man's  writing,  informed  and  quickened  by  the  presence 
of  the  Holy  Ghost,  they  admit,  should  it  so  happen,  of  being 
composed  of  outlying  materials,  which  have  passed  through 
the  minds  and  from  the  fingers  of  inspired  penmen,  and  are 
known  to  be  inspired  on  the  ground  that  those  who  were  the 
immediate  editors,  as  they  may  be  called,  were  inspired. 

"  For  an  example  of  this  we  are  supplied  by  the  writer  of 
the  second  book  of  Machabees,  to  which  reference  has  already 
been  made.  'All  such  things, '  says  the  writer,  '  as  have  been 
comprised  in  five  books  by  Jason  of  Cyrene,  we  have  attempt- 
ed to  abridge  in  one  book.'  Here  we  have  the  human 
aspect  of  an  inspired  work.  Jason  need  not,  the  writer  of 
the  second  book  of  Machabees  must,  have  been  inspired. 

"Again;  St.  Luke's  gospel  is  inspired,  as  having  gone 
through  and  come  forth  from  an  inspired  mind ;  but  the 
extrinsic  sources  of  his  narrative  were  not  necessarily  all 
inspired  any  more  than  was  Jason  of  Cyrene ;  yet  such 
sources  there  were,  for,  in  contrast  with  the  testimony  of  the 
actual  eye-witnesses  of  the  events  which  he  records,  he  says 
of  himself  that  he  wrote  after  a  careful  inquiry, '  according  as 
they  delivered  them  to  us,  who  from  the  beginning  were 
eye-witnesses  and  ministers  of  the  word ; '  as  to  himself,  he 
had  but  'diligently  attained  to  all  things  from  the  beginning. ' 
Here  it  was  not  the  original  statements,  but  his  edition  of 
them,  which  needed  to  be  inspired. 

"  Hence  we  have  no  reason  to  be  surprised,  nor  is  it 
against  the  faith  to  hold,  that  a  canonical  book  may  be  com- 
posed, not  only  from,  but  even  of,  pre-existing  documents, 
it  being  always  borne  in  mind,  as  a  necessary  condition,  that 


124  CARD.    NEWMAN 

an  inspired  mind  has  exercised  a  supreme  and  an  ultimate 
judgment  on  the  work,  determining  what  was  to  be  selected 
and  embodied  in  it,  in  order  to  its  truth  in  all  'matters 
of  faith  and  morals  pertaining  to  the  edification  of  Christian 
doctrine, '  and  its  unadulterated  truth. 

"Thus  Moses  may  have  incorporated  in  his  manuscript 
as  much  from  foreign  documents  as  is  commonly  maintained 
by  the  critical  school ;  yet  the  existing  Pentateuch,  with  the 
miracles  which  it  contains,  may  still  (from  that  personal 
inspiration  which  belongs  to  a  prophet)  have  flowed  from 
his  mind  and  hand  on  to  his  composition.  He  new-made 
and  authenticated  what  till  then  was  no  matter  of  faith. 

"This  being  considered,  it  follows  that  a  book  may  be, 
and  may  be  accepted  as,  inspired,  though  not  a  word  of  it 
is  an  original  document.  Such  is  almost  the  case  with  the 
first  book  of  Esdras.  A  learned  writer  in  a  publication  of  the 
day*  says:  *It  consists  of  the  contemporary  historical  jour- 
nals, kept  from  time  to  time  by  the  prophets  or  other  author- 
ized persons  who  were  eye-witnesses  for  the  most  part  of 
what  they  record,  and  whose  several  narratives  were  after- 
wards strung  together,  and  either  abridged  or  added  to,  as 
the  case  required,  by  a  later  hand,  of  course  an  inspired 
hand.' 

"  And  in  like  manner  the  Chaldee  and  Greek  portions  of 
the  book  of  Daniel,  even  though  not  written  by  Daniel,  may 
be,  and  we  believe  are,  written  by  penmen  inspired  in  matters 
of  faith  and  morals ;  and  so  much,  and  nothing  beyond,  does 
the  Church  'oblige'  us  to  believe. 

"  I  have  said  that  the  Chaldee,  as  well  as  the  Hebrew 
portion  of  Daniel  requires,  in  order  to  its  inspiration,  not  that 
it  should  be  Daniel's  writing,  but  that  its  writer,  whoever  he 
was,  should  be  inspired.  This  leads  me  to  the  question 
whether  inspiration  requires  and  implies  that  the  book 
inspired  should  in  its  form  and  matter  be  homogeneous,  and 
all  its  parts  belong  to  each  other.  Certainly  not.  The  book 
of  Psalms  is  the  obvious  instance  destructive  of  any  such 

*  Smith.' s  Dictionary . 


CARD.    NEWMAN  125 

idea.  What  it  really  requires  is  an  inspired  Editor  ;*  that  is, 
an  inspired  mind,  authoritative  in  faith  and  morals,  from 
whose  fingers  the  sacred  text  passed.  I  believe  it  is  allowed 
generally,  that  at  the  date  of  the  captivity  and  under  the  per- 
secution of  Antiochus,  the  books  of  Scripture  and  the  sacred 
text  suffered  much  loss  and  injury.  Originally  the  Psalms 
seem  to  have  consisted  of  five  books;  of  which  only  a  portion, 
perhaps  the  first  and  second,  were  David's.  That  arrange- 
ment is  now  broken  up,  and  the  Council  of  Trent  was  so  im- 
pressed with  the  difficulty  of  their  authorship,  that,  in  its 
formal  decree  respecting  the  Canon,  instead  of  calling  the 
collection  '  David's  Psalms, '  as  was  usual,  they  called  it  the 
Tsalterium  Davidicum, '  thereby  meaning  to  imply,  that 
although  canonical  and  inspired  and  in  spiritual  fellowship 
and  relationship  with  those  of  'the  choice  Psalmist  of  Israel, ' 
the  whole  collection  is  not  therefore  necessarily  the  writing  of 
David. 

"  And  as  the  name  of  David,  though  not  really  applicable 
to  every  Psalm,  nevertheless  protected  and  sanctioned 
them  all,  so  the  appendices  which  conclude  the  book  of 
Daniel,  Susanna  and  Bel,  though  not  belonging  to  the  main 
history,  come  under  the  shadow  of  the  Divine  Presence 
which  primarily  rests  on  what  goes  before. 

"And  so  again,  whether  or  not  the  last  verses  of  St. 
Mark's,  and  two  portions  of  St. John's  Gospel,  belong  to  those 
Evangelists  respectively,  matters  not  as  regards  their  inspira- 
tion ;  for  the  Church  has  recognised  them  as  portions  of  that 
sacred  narrative  which  precedes  or  embraces  them. 

**  Nor  does  it  matter  whether  one  or  two  Isaiahs  wrote 
the  book  which  bears  that  Prophet's  name;  the  Church, 
without  settling  this  point,  pronounces  it  inspired  in  respect 
of  faith  and  morals,  both  Isaiahs  being  inspired;  and,  if 

*  This  representation  must  not  be  confused  with  either  of  the  two 
views  of  Canonicity  which  are  pronounced  insufficient  by  the  Vatican 
Council — viz.  i,  that  in  order  to  be  sacred  and  canonical,  it  is  enough  for 
a  book  to  be  a  work  of  mere  human  industry,  provided  it  be  afterwards 
approved  by  the  authorities  of  the  Church;  and  2,  that  it  is  enough  if  it 
contains  revealed  teaching  without  error.  Neither  of  these  views  sup- 
poses the  presence  of  inspiration,  whether  in  the  writer  or  the  writing; 
what  is  contemplated  above  is  an  inspired  writer  in  the  exercise  of  his 
inspiration,  and  a  work  inspired  from  first  to  last  under  the  action  of 
that  inspiration. 


126  CARD.    NEWMAN 

this  be  assured  to  us,  all  other  questions  are  irrelevant  and 
unnecessary." 

**  Nor  do  the  Councils  forbid  our  holding  that  there  are 
interpolations  or  additions  in  the  sacred  text,  say,  the  last 
chapter  of  the  Pentateuch,  provided  they  are  held  to  come 
from  an  inspired  penman,  such  as  Esdras,  and  are  thereby 
authoritative  in  faith  and  morals. 

*'  From  what  has  been  last  said  it  follows,  that  the  titles 
of  the  Canonical  books,  and  their  ascription  to  different 
authors,  either  do  not  come  under  their  inspiration,  or  need 
not  be  accepted  literally. 

" For  instance:  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  is  said  in  our 
Bibles  to  be  the  writing  of  St.  Paul,  and  so  virtually  it  is, 
and  to  deny  that  it  is  so  in  any  sense  might  be  temerarious ; 
but  its  authorship  is  not  a  matter  of  faith  as  its  inspiration 
is,  but  an  acceptance  of  received  opinion,  and  because  to  no 
other  writer  can  it  be  so  well  assigned. 

''Again,  the  89th  Psalm  has  for  its  title  *A  Prayer  of 
Moses, '  yet  that  has  not  hindered  a  succession  of  Catholic 
writers,  from  Athanasius  to  Bellarmine,  from  denying  it  to 
be  his. 

"Again,  the  Book  of  Wisdom  professes  (e.  g.,  chs.  vii. 
and  ix.)  to  be  written  by  Solomon;  yet  our  Bibles  say,  'It  is 
written  in  the  person  of  Solomon, '  and  'it  is  uncertain  who 
was  the  writer;'  and  St.  Augustine,  whose  authority  had  so 
much  influence  in  the  settlement  of  the  Canon,  speaking  of 
Wisdom  and  Ecclesiasticus,  says :  'The  two  books  by  reason 
of  a  certain  similarity  of  style  are  usually  called  Solomon's 
though  the  more  learned  have  no  doubt  they  do  not  belong 
to  him.'     (Martin.  Pref.  to  Wisdom  and  EccL;  Aug.  0pp.  t. 

iii-  p.  733.) 

^'li  these  instances  hold,  they  are  precedents  for  saying 
that  it  is  no  sin  against  the  faith  (for  of  such  I  have  all  along 
been  speaking),  nor  indeed,  if  done  conscientiously  and  on 
reasonable  grounds,  any  sin,  to  hold  that  Ecclesiastes  is  not 
the  writing  of  Solomon,  in  spite  of  its  opening  with  a  pro- 
fession of  being  his ;  and  that  first,  because  that  profession 
is  a  heading,  not  a  portion  of  the  book;  secondly,  because, 
even  though  it  be  part  of  the  book,  a  like  profession  is  made 


CARD.    NEWMAN  127 

in  the  Book  of  Wisdom,  without  its  being  a  proof  that 
'Wisdom'  is  Solomon's;  and  thirdly,  because  such  a  pro- 
fession may  well  be  considered  a  prosopopoeia  not  so  difficult 
to  imderstand  as  that  of  the  Angel  Raphael,  when  he  called 
himself  'the  Son  of  the  great  Ananias. ' 

"  On  this  subject  Melchior  Canus  says :  'It  does  not  much 
matter  to  the  Catholic  Faith,  that  a  book  was  written  by  this 
or  that  writer,  so  long  as  the  Spirit  of  God  is  believed  to  be 
the  author  of  it ;  which  Gregory  delivers  and  explains,  in  his 
Preface  to  Job,  '  It  matters  not  with  what  pen  the  King  has 
written  his  letter,  if  it  be  true  that  He  has  written  it.' 
{Loc.  Th.  p.  44.) 

^'I  say  then  of  the  Book  of  Ecclesiastes,  its  authorship  is 
one  of  those  questions  which  still  lie  in  the  hands  of  the 
Church.  If  the  Church  formally  declared  that  it  was  written 
by  Solomon,  I  consider  that,  in  accordance  with  its  heading 
(and,  as  implied  in  what  follows,  as  in  'Wisdom, ')  we  should 
be  bound,  recollecting  that  she  has  the  gift  of  judging  'de 
vero  sensu  et  interpret atione  Scrip turarum  Sanctarum, '  to 
accept  such  a  decree  as  a  matter  of  faith ;  and  in  like  manner, 
in  spite  of  its  heading,  we  should  be  bound  to  accept  a 
contrary  decree,  if  made  to  the  effect  that  the  book  was  not 
Solomon's.  At  present  as  the  Church  (or  Pope)  has  not 
pronounced  on  one  side  or  on  the  other,  I  conceive  that,  till 
a  decision  comes  from  Rome,  either  opinion  is  open  to  the 
Catholic  without  any  impeachment  of  his  faith. 

"And  here  I  am  led  on  to  inquire  whether  obiter  dicta 
are  conceivable  in  an  inspired  document.  We  know  that 
they  are  held  to  exist  and  even  required  in  treating  of  the 
dogmatic  utterances  of  Popes,  but  are  they  compatible  with 
inspiration?  The  common  opinion  is  that  they  are  not. 
Professor  Lamy  thus  writes  about  them,  in  the  form  of  an 
objection :  'Many  minute  matters  occur  in  the  sacred  writers 
which  have  regard  only  to  human  feebleness  and  the  natural 
necessities  of  life,  and  by  no  means  require  inspiration, 
since  they  can  otherwise  be  perfectly  well  known,  and  seem 
scarcely  worthy  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  as  for  instance  what  is 
said  of  the  dog  of  Tobias,  St.  Paul's  penula,  and  the  saluta- 
tions at  the  end  of  the  Epistles. '     Neither  he  nor  Fr.  Patrizi 


128  BISHOP    HEALY 

allow  of  these  exceptions ;  but  Fr.  Patrizi,  as  Lamy  quotes 
him,  'damnare  non  audet  eos  qui  haec  tenerent, '  viz.,  ex- 
ceptions, and  he  himself,  by  keeping  silence,  seems  unable 
to  condemn  them  either. 

"  By  obiter  dicta  in  Scripture  I  also  mean  such  statements 
as  we  find  in  the  Book  of  Judith,  that  Nabuchodonosor  was 
king  of  Nineve.  Now  it  is  in  favour  of  there  being  such 
unauthoritative  obiter  dicta,  that  unlike  those  which  occur 
in  dogmatic  utterances  of  Popes  and  Councils,  they  are,  in 
Scripture,  not  doctrinal,  but  mere  unimportant  statements 
of  fact ;  whereas  those  of  Popes  and  Councils  may  relate 
to  faith  and  morals,  and  are  said  to  be  uttered  obiter,  because 
they  are  not  contained  within  the  scope  of  the  formal  defini- 
tion, and  imply  no  intention  of  binding  the  consciences  of  the 
faithful.  There  does  not  then  seem  any  serious  difficulty  in 
admitting  their  existence  in  Scripture.  Let  it  be  observed, 
its  miracles  are  doctrinal  facts,  and  in  no  sense  of  the  phrase 
can  be  considered  obiter  dicta. 

'*It  may  be  questioned,  too,  whether  the  absence  of 
chronological  sequence  might  not  be  represented  as  an  in- 
fringement of  plenary  inspiration,  more  serious  than  the 
obiter  dicta  of  which  I  have  been  speaking.  Yet  St.  Matthew 
is  admitted  by  approved  commentators  to  be  unsolicitous  as 
to  order  of  time.  So  says  Fr.  Patrizi  {De  Evang.  lib.ii.  p.  i), 
viz.,  'Matthasum  de  observando  temporis  ordine  minime 
soUicitum  esse. '  He  gives  instances,  and  then  repeats, 
'Matthew  did  not  observe  order  of  time. '  If  such  absence 
of  order  is  compatible  with  inspiration  in  St.  Matthew,  as  it 
is,  it  might  be  consistent  with  inspiration  in  parts  of  the  Old 
Testament,  supposing  they  are  open  to  re -arrangement  in 
chronology.  Does  not  this  teach  us  to  fall  back  upon  the 
decision  of  the  Councils  that  'faith  and  morals  pertaining  to 
the  edification  of  Christian  doctrine'  are  the  scope,  the  true 
scope,  of  inspiration?  And  is  not  the  Holy  See  the  judge 
given  us  for  determining  what  is  for  edification  and  what  is 
not?" 

In  the  Irish  Ecclesiastical  Record  of  March,  1884,  Rev. 
John  Healy  (afterward  Bishop  Healy)  published  an  article 
in  w^hich  he  dissented  from  Card.  Newman.     As  Healy 's 


BISHOP    HEALY  129 

article  seems  to  us  to  express  a  clear  statement  of  the  Catholic 
doctrine  we  reproduce  it  here  nearly  in  full:  "With  regard 
to  the  Cardinal's  views  on  the  interpretation  of  Scripture, 
we  have  nothing  to  say ;  he  merely  expresses  the  common 
teaching  of  theologians  on  this  point.  We  shall,  therefore, 
confine  ourselves  to  the  first  question  which  he  discusses — 
the  authority  or  inspiration  of  Sacred  Scripture, 

''In  answer  to  his  own  question  on  this  point — What  is 
de  fide  with  regard  to  the  inspiration  of  Scripture?  his  reply 
is : — 'As  to  the  authority  of  Scripture,  we  hold  it  to  be,  in  all 
matters  of  faith  and  morals,  divinely  inspired  throughout/ 
In  No.  1 1  he  tells  us  that  the  Coimcils  of  Trent  and  the  Vati- 
can 'specify  "faith  and  moral  conduct"  as  the  'drift'  of  that 
teaching  (in  Scripture)  which  has  the  guarantee  of  inspira- 
tion.' In  No.  12  he  says  that  the  Vatican  Council  pro- 
noimces  that  supernatural  Revelation  consists  'in  rebus 
divinis,'  and  is  contained — the  italics  are  not  ours — 'in  libris 
scriptis  et  sine  scriptis  traditionibus.'  And  finally,  in  No. 
13,  he  asserts  that  while  the  Cotmcils,  as  has  been  shown, 
lay  down  so  emphatically  the  inspiration  of  Scripture  in 
respect  to  'faith  and  morals,'  it  is  remarkable  that  they  do 
not  say  a  word  directly  as  to  its  inspiration  in  'matters  of 
fact ;'  and  hence  he  raises  the  question — but  does  not  answer 
it — whether  there  may  not  be  in  Scripture,  as  there  are  in 
the  dogmatic  utterances  of  Popes  and  Councils,  obiter  dicta, 
'unimportant  "statements  of  fact,"  not  inspired,  and  there- 
fore unauthoritative'  (No.  26),  and,  we  may  add,  not  even 
necessarily  true. 

"The  merest  tyro  in  the  schools  of  Catholic  theology  will 
at  once  perceive  the  startling  character  of  these  statements, 
and  the  pregnant  consequences  which  they  involve.  Hence 
we  propose  to  examine  them  very  briefly,  in  order  to 
ascertain  if  the  de  fide  utterances  of  the  Church  on  this  mat- 
ter of  the  inspiration  of  the  sacred  volume  are  exactly  of  the 
character  described  by  Card.  Newman;  and  we  shall  for  the 
most  part  confine  ourselves  to  an  analysis  of  these  dogmatic 
utterances  themselves. 

"Of  course,  when  the  Cardinal  says  it  is  de  fide  that 
Scripture,  in  all  matters  of  faith  and  morals,  is  divinely  in- 

(9)  H.S. 


130  BISHOP    HEALY 

Spired  throughout,  he  says  what  is  true;  but  he  certainly 
seems  to  imply  that  it  is  not  de  fide  that  Scripture  is  inspired 
in  those  things  (if  there  be  any  such)  which  are  not  'matters 
of  faith  and  morals.'  Now,  here  precisely  we  join  issue,  and 
we  say  that,  in  our  opinion,  the  Catholic  dogma,  as  defined 
both  in  the  Council  of  Trent  and  the  Vatican,  admits  of  no 
such  restricting  clause ;  that  it  is  adequately  and  accurately 
expressed  only  by  eliminating  that  clause ;  or,  in  other  words, 
the  Catholic  dogma  is,  to  borrow  some  of  the  Cardinal's  own 
words,  that  Sacred  Scripture  is  divinely  inspired  throughout. 

"The  Coimcil  of  Trent  first  enumerates  the  books  that 
constitute  the  canon  of  Scripture,  and  then,  in  the  strictest 
language,  formulates  its  decree  in  the  following  words : —  'Si 
quis  autem  libros  ipsos  integros  cum  omnibus  suis  partibus, 
prout  in  ecclesia  Catholica  legi  consueverunt,  et  in  veteri 
vulgata  latina  editione  habentur,  pro  sacris  et  canonicis  non 
susceperit,  et  traditiones  praedictas  sciens  et  prudens  con- 
tempserit,  anathema  sit.'*  There  is  here  no  restriction  of 
inspiration  or  canonicity  to  matters  of  faith  and  morals; 
the  entire  books,  with  all  their  parts,  are  declared  to  be  sacred 
and  canonical,  that  is,  inspired  Scripture,  recognised  as  such 
by  the  Church ;  for,  as  we  shall  see,  that  is  the  meaning  of 
sacred  and  canonical,  as  applied  by  the  Council  of  Trent  and 
of  the  Vatican  to  the  books  of  Scripture.  If  we  take  the 
expression  'entire  books,  with  all  their  parts,'  to  be  equiva- 
lent to  the  Cardinal's  word  throughout,  we  have  a  right  to 
conclude  that  the  Catholic  dogma,  as  enunciated  in  that 
canon,  proclaims  that  these  canonical  books  are  inspired 
throughout,  and  therefore  not  merely  in  questions  of  faith  and 
morals. 

"Lest  there  might  be  any  doubt  of  the  meaning  of  the 
expression  'pro  sacris  et  canonicis,'  we  beg  to  append  the 
analogous  canon  in  the  Vatican  Council,  which,  in  our  opinion, 
leaves  no  doubt  about  the  matter.  Here  it  is: — 'Si  quis 
sacrae  Scripturae  libros  integros  cum  omnibus  suis  partibus, 
prout  illos  Sancta  Tridentina  Synodus  recensuit,  pro  sacris 
et  canonicis  non  susceperit,  aut  eos  divinitus  inspiratos  esse 

*  Quarta  Sessio,  Deer,  de  Canonicis  Scripturis. 


BISHOP    HEALY  131 

negaverit,  anathema  sit.'  (Can.  4,  De  Revelatione.)  It  is 
impossible  to  enunciate  in  clearer  language  the  great  Catholic 
truth,  that  the  entire  books  of  Sacred  Scripture,  with  all  their 
parts,  are  divinely  inspired ;  or  in  other  words,  that  the  books 
of  Sacred  Scripture  are  inspired  throughout.  If  any  one 
should  urge  that  perhaps  'eos,'  in  the  last  clause  of  this  canon 
is  not  necessarily  the  exact  equivalent  of  the  subject  of  the 
preceding  clause,  our  answer  is,  that  both  grammatically 
and  logically  *eos'  and  'illos'  stand  for  the  subject  of  the 
preceding  clause,  and  are  therefore  exactly  co-extensive 
with  it.  At  any  rate,  the  Council  pronounces  the  entire 
books — eos,  scil,  libros  integros — to  be  inspired,  without 
making  any  distinction  between  'matters  of  fact'  and  'matters 
of  faith  and  morals,'  and  that  is  quite  enough  for  our  argu- 
ment. 

"Every  one  trained  in  theological  discipline  knows  that 
it  is  not  always  easy  to  ascertain,  from  the  wording  in  the 
body  of  a  dogmatic  chapter  of  a  General  Council,  what  is 
strictly  and  exactly  de  fide.  But  when  a  Council  wishes  to 
express  Catholic  dogma  with  the  utmost  accuracy  and  ex- 
actness, it  formulates  it  as  a  canon,  and  pronounces  anathema 
against  the  gainsayers.  I  have  a  right,  therefore,  to  infer 
from  this  canon,  as  a  Catholic  dogma,  that  Sacred  Scripture, 
without  exception  or  restriction,  is  inspired  throughout. 

''Cardinal  Newman  says  that  the  dogmatic  phrase  used  by 
the  Coimcils  of  Florence  and  Trent  to  denote  the  inspiration 
of  Scripture,  viz.,  that  one  and  the  same  God  was  the  author 
of  both  Testaments — Deus  unus  et  idem  utriusque  Testa- 
menti  Auctor — left  some  room  for  holding  that  the  word 
'Testament'  might  mean  'Dispensation,  rather  than  the 
Books  of  the  Testaments,  although  he  admits  that  the  Vati- 
can Council  has  settled  the  question  by  inserting  the  word 
•"books." 

"It  appears  to  us  that  the  Council  of  Florence  left  no 
doubt  about  the  matter,  for  it  has  explained  the  meaning  of 
the  word  'Testament'  in  its  decree,  as  may  be  seen  in  so 
common  a  book  as  Franzelin  (De  Inspir.  S.  Scrip.  Thesis.  IL, 
No.  I.)     Here  are  the  words: — 


132  BISHOP    HEALY 

"  Tirmissime  credit,  profitetur  et  praedicat  (Sacrosancta 
Rom.  Ecclesia)  tinum  verum  Deum  Patrem  et  Filitim  et 
Spiritum  Sanctum  creatorem.  .  .  .  Unum  atque  eundem 
Deum  Veteris  et  Novi  Testament!,  hoc  est,  Legis  et  Pro- 
phetarum  atque  Evangelii  profitetur  Auctorem,  quoniam  eodem 
Spiritu  Sancto  inspirante  utriusque  Testamenti  sancti  locuti 
sunt,  quorum  libros  suscipit  et  veneratur,  qui  titulis  sequent- 
ibus  continent ur.' 

"Surely  the  expression  'Old  and  New  Testament,'  when 
explained  to  mean  'the  Law,  the  Prophets,  and  the  Gospel,' 
can  mean  nothing  else  but  the  Sacred  Books  that  commonly 
go  under  these  names. 

"But  if  there  could  be  any  doubt  about  the  matter  it 
would  be  removed  by  the  reason  that  is  subjoined — God  is 
the  author  of  the  Law,  the  Prophets,  and  the  Gospel,  because 
it  was  under  the  inspiration  of  His  Holy  Spirit  that  the  saints 
of  both  Testaments  spoke,  whose  books,  therefore,  the  Coun- 
cil receives  and  venerates.  The  word  'locuti'  evidently  re- 
fers to  the  written  word,  as  in  2  Peter  L,  21,  and,  in  conjunc- 
tion with  libros,  clearly  shows  that  by  Testament  the  Coim- 
cil  meant  the  books  of  the  Old  and  New  Testament — that  is, 
as  it  explains,  the  Law,  the  Prophets,  and  the  Gospels. 

"It  is  difficult  to  see  how  this  explanation  given  by  the 
Council  itself  can  be  reconciled  with  the  statement  that  the 
Councils  of  Florence  and  Trent  left  the  meaning  of  the  word 
Testament  in  the  phrase  referred  to  somewhat  doubtful. 
The  Council  of  Florence  certainly  did  not;  and,  Pallavicini 
tells  us,  the  Council  of  Trent,  in  framing  its  decree,  was 
careful  to  follow  the  very  words  of  the  Council  of  Flor- 
ence.* 

"It  is  defined  both  by  the  Councils  of  Trent  and  of  Flor- 
ence, that  God  is  the  auctor  utriusque  Testamenti,  and  as  we 
have  just  seen,  that  is  the  same  as  to  say  he  is  the  author  of 
all  the  books  of  the  Old  and  New  Testament ;  and  so  it  has 
been  expressly  defined  by  the  Vatican  Council,  as  the  Card- 
inal himself  admits.  But,  he  says,  the  Latin  word  auctor 
still  leaves  some  ambiguity,  for  it  is  not  equivalent  to  the 

*  Hist.  Concil.  Trid.  Lib.  VI.  c.  11,  n.  11- 14. 


BISHOP    HEALY  133 

English  word  author.  That  may  be  very  true,  when  there 
is  question  of  the  words  auctor  and  author  in  their  generic 
sense;  it  is  too  delicate  a  point  for  us  to  discuss,  and  it  is 
quite  unnecessary  to  discuss  it.  For  there  is  no  question 
ilow  of  the  generic  meaning,  which  as  Cardinal  Franzelin 
clearly  points  out  (Thesis  III.,  No.  i.)  is  determined  by  the 
context,  that  is,  by  the  special  efficiency  of  which  there  is 
question.  Generically,  both  in  English  and  Latin,  'author' 
means  the  person  who  gives  origin  or  authority  to  anything, 
but  in  its  specific  sense  the  meaning  will  very  much  depend 
on  the  kind  of  origin  or  authority  of  which  there  is  question. 
The  same  may  be  the  author  of  a  law,  the  author  of  a  book, 
and  the  author  of  a  crime,  but  in  very  different  senses.  Now 
it  is  de  fide  that  God  is  the  author  oj  the  Books  of  the  Old  and 
New  Testament,  and  will  the  Cardinal  undertake  to  say, 
that  when  thus  used  in  regard  to  books,  auctor  in  classical 
Latin  is  not  equivalent  to  'author'  when  said  in  reference  to 
books  in  English?  We  do  not  pretend  to  the  Cardinal's 
knowledge  of  classical  Latin,  but  we  know  something  of 
ecclesiastical  Latin,  as  used  by  the  Coimcils  of  Trent  and 
Florence,  and  we  are  quite  sure  that  auctor  lihri  in  ecclesiasti- 
cal Latin  is  pretty  much  the  same  as  the  'author  of  a  book' 
in  English. 

'Tt  is  de  fide,  therefore,  that  God  is  the  author  of  all  the 
Books  of  the  Old  and  New  Testament;  and  we  have  seen 
that  it  is  de  fide  that  they  are  inspired  throughout,  whole  and 
entire,  without  any  distinction  between  'matters  of  fact' 
and  'matters  of  faith  and  morals.'  Well,  now,  in  No.  ii, 
the  Cardinal  asks,  in  what  respect  are  the  Canonical  Books 
inspired?  'It  cannot  be  in  every  respect,'  he  says,  'except 
we  are  bound  de  fide  to  believe  that  'terra  in  aetemum  stat,' 
that  heaven  is  above  us,  and  that  there  are  no  antipodes.' 
If  by  'respect'  is  meant  every  signification  which  a  word  of 
phrase  might  have,  scientific  or  popular,  literal  or  meta- 
phorical, he  is  evidently  right ;  but  then  it  is  hardly  necessary 
to  tell  us  so.  Surely  the  phrases  'terra  in  aetemimi  stat,' 
'and  heaven  is  above  us,'  'the  sim  rises,'  and  the  like,  have  a 
popular  meaning  which  is  perfectly  true,    and  which  might 


134  BISHOP    HEALY 

be  revealed  by  God,  and  which  if  revealed  by  God,  in- 
cidentally or  otherwise,  in  that  popular  sense,  we  should 
be  bound  to  believe  it  de  fide. 

"But  apparently  this  is  not  what  Cardinal  Newman  means, 
for  in  the  next  sentence  he  says :  'And  it  seems  unworthy 
of  Divine  greatness  that  the  Almighty  should,  in  His  revela- 
tion of  Himself  to  us,  undertake  mere  secular  duties,  and 
assume  the  office  of  a  narrator  as  such,  of  a  historian,  or 
geographer,  except  so  far  as  the  secular  matters  bear  di- 
rectly on  the  revealed  truth.'  Does  any  one  assert  that  God 
in  His  Revelation  undertakes  the  office  of  narrator,  as  such, 
or  historian,  or  geographer?  We  thought  it  was  a  well- 
known  distinction  made  by  Catholic  theologians  of  every 
school  between  the  things  revealed  propter  se,  or,  as  the 
Cardinal  caUs  them,  matters  of  faith  and  morals,  and  things 
revealed  per  accidens,  including  every  other  statement  made 
in  Sacred  Scripture,  whether  in  narration,  history,  geography, 
or  anything  else.  God  reveals  none  of  these  things  propter 
se.  He  does  not  undertake  the  work  of  annalist,  historian, 
geographer,  as  such.  They  are  revealed  on  accoimt  of  their 
connection,  necessary,  useful,  or  accidental  as  the  case  may 
be,  with  the  main  purposes  of  Divine  Revelation.  But  as 
Benedict  XII.  in  his  Dogmatic  Catalogue  of  the  Errors  of 
the  Armenians  very  clearly  signifies,  they  must  be  all  believed 
even  those  which  have  been  revealed  per  accidens,  because 
they  are  all  equally  the  word  of  God,  and  all  serve  a  useful 
purpose  in  the  Divine  economy  of  our  salvation.*  'For 
whatsoever  things  were  written,  were  written  for  our  learning ; 
that  through  patience  and  the  comfort  of  the  Scriptures  we 
might  have  hope.'     Rom.  XV.  4. 

"And  what  is  man  that  he  should  undertake  to  pronounce 
what  is  worthy,  or  what  is  unworthy  of  Divine  Majesty? 
If  we  were  to  attempt  to  do  so,  especially  in  God's  revelation, 
where  should  we  stop?  Does  not  the  Socinian  think  it  un- 
worthy of  God  to  reveal  mysteries?  The  Rationalist,  for  a 
somewhat  similar  reason,  denies  miracles.     The  ordinary 

*  See  Franzelin  note,  Thesis  iii.  p.  352.  The  114th  error  in  the 
Catalogue  seems  to  consist  in  the  fact  that  the  Armenians  assumed  a 
historical  statement  in  Genesis  to  be  false. 


BISHOP    HEALY  135 

protestant  contends  that  the  CathoHc  teaching  about  the 
Blessed  Eucharist  is  utterly  unworthy  of  God,  and  so  he 
gives  up  the  literal,  and  adopts  a  metaphorical  sense.  It  is 
the  old  story — Durus  est  hie  sermo,  et  quis  potest  eum 
audire?  Our  reply  is — Quis  cognovit  sensum  domini,  qui 
instruat  eum?  Human  wisdom  left  to  itself  would  say  that 
of  all  unworthy  things  the  most  unworthy  of  God  was  to  re- 
deem the  word  by  the  'folly'  of  the  cross ;  and  it  did  say  it  by 
the  mouth  both  of  Jew  and  Gentile. 

"We  have  no  objection  to  the  statement  that  faith  and 
moral  conduct  is  the  'drift'  of  the  teaching  that  has  the 
guarantee  of  inspiration,  or  that  the  Council  of  Trent  insists 
on  faith  and  morality  as  the  'scope'  of  inspired  teaching, 
provided  always  it  is  not  thereby  implied  that  Scripture  is 
not  also  inspired  throughout,  even  in  those  things  which 
to  us  seem  to  have  least  connection  with  faith  and  morals. 
It  is  in  this  sense  and  in  no  other  sense  the  Council  of  Trent 
speaks.  In  the  preamble  of  the  chapter  it  states,  as  Cardinal 
Newman  says,  that  faith  and  morality  is  the  'scope'  of  in- 
spired teaching,  and  that  the  Gospel  is  the  'fount'  of  all  sav- 
ing truth  and  all  instruction  in  morals ;  and  this  is  perfectly 
true,  but  the  main  proposition  to  which  everything  else  is 
incidental  is  contained  in  the  following  words,  which  neces- 
sarily imply  the  inspiration  of  every  single  statement  made 
by  sacred  writers.  'Sacrosancta.  .  .  .  Sy nodus  .  .  . 
orthodoxorum  patrum  exempla  secuta,  omnes  libros  tam 
Veteris  quam  Novi  Testamenti,  cum  utriusque  unus  Deus 
sit  auctor,  necnon  traditiones  ipsas,  tum  ad  fidem,  tum  ad 
mores  pertinentes,  tanquam  vel  oretenus  a  Christo,  vel  a 
Spiritu  Sancto  dictatas  et  continua  successione  in  ecclesia 
Catholica  conservatas  pari  pietatis  affectu  et  reverentia 
suscipit  et  veneratur.'  From  the  beginning  of  the  chapter 
to  the  word  veneratur  is  one  single  sentence ;  the  last  part,  as 
written  by  us,  contains  the  main  assertion,  the  purport  of 
which  is  perfectly  clear :  that  as  God  is  the  author  of  all  the 
books  of  the  Old  and  New  Testament,  and,  as  the  divine 
traditions  regarding  faith  and  morals  were  either  spoken  by 
Christ  himself  or  dictated  by  His  Holy  Spirit,  therefore  the 
Council  accepts  and  venerates  both  with  equal  affection  of 


136  BISHOP    HEALY 

piety  and  reverence — and  why?  because  they  are  both 
equally  the  Word  of  God.  It  must  be  carefully  observed 
that  the  words  'turn  ad  fidem,  turn  ad  mores  pertinentes' — 
refer  only  to  the  traditions,  and  have  nothing  at  all  to  do 
with  the  preceding  words.  And  they  were  inserted,  as  Pal- 
la  vicini  tells  us,  in  order  to  distinguish  the  divine  traditions, 
of  which  God  is  the  author,  and  which  concern  faith  and 
morals,  from  purely  apostolic  and  ecclesiastical  traditions, 
which  are  of  their  own  nature  disciplinary  and  mutable.  So 
far,  therefore,  is  the  Council  of  Trent  from  lending  any  count- 
enance to  the  idea  that  all  Scripture  is  not  inspired,  that  it 
distinctly  affirms  the  divine  authorship  of  all  the  books  of 
Sacred  Scripture,  and  we  have  seen,  pronounces  anathema 
against  those  who  would  dare  to  assert  that  they  are  not 
'sacred  and  canonical,'  and  inspired  Scripture  throughout. 
"There  is  one  point  to  be  carefully  kept  in  mind  in  any 
discussion  on  this  important  question,  if  we  wish  to  avoid 
grave  errors — the  difference  between  inspiration  and  revela- 
tion. Inspiration,  as  we  shall  see  further  on,  in  its  plenary 
sense,  implies  three  things,  the  Divine  afflatus  moving  ,  en- 
lightening, and  guiding  the  writer — inspiratio  active  sumpta : 
the  state  of  the  himian  agent  under  this  Divine  influence — 
inspiratio  passive  stmipta;  and,  lastly,  the  product  of  the 
combined  action  of  God  and  man,  that  is  ,  the  book  written 
by  the  Holy  Spirit  through  man's  agency — which  is  inspir- 
atio terminative  simipta.  Inspiration  therefore,  in  reference 
to  Sacred  Scripture,  essentially  regards  the  writing — the 
writing  in  fieri,  and  the  writing  in  facto  esse.  Not  so  in  the 
case  of  revelation.  It  need  have  no  connection  with  in- 
spired writing  at  all.  In  its  active  sense  it  is  simply  the  Di- 
vine manifestation  of  hidden  things,  and  sometimes  of  things 
not  previously  hidden ;  in  its  objective  sense  it  merely  means 
the  things  so  made  known  by  God.  Inspiration,  therefore, 
necessarily  implies  revelation  in  the  wide  sense  given  above ; 
but  revelation,  as  in  the  case  of  Divine  traditions  not  con- 
tained in  Scripture,  may  have  nothing  at  all  to  do  with  in- 
spiration. Let  our  readers  bear  this  in  mind,  for  the  Card- 
inal goes  on  to  say  that  'the  Vatican  Council  pronounces  that 
supernatural  revelation  consists  in  rebus  Divinis,  and  is  con- 


BISHOP    HEALY  137 

tained  in  libris  scriptis,  et  sine  scriptis  traditionibus,'  italicis- 
ing as  above,  and  implying  thereby,  it  seems  to  us,  that  all 
Sacred  Scripture  is  not  necessarily  Divine  truth  or  a  Divine 
revelation,  and  that  revelation  and  inspiration  are  identical. 

''What  the  Council  says  on  the  first  point  is  contained  in 
the  following  sentence,  and  certainly  will  not  admit  the 
meaning  given  above  by  implication : — *Huic  Divinae  revela- 
tioni  tribuendum  quidem  est,  ut  ea,  quae  in  rebus  Divinis 
humanae  rationi  per  se  impervia  non  sunt,  in  presenti  quoque 
generis  humani  conditione  ab  omnibus  expedite,  firma  cer- 
titudine,  et  nullo  admixto  errore  cognosci  possint."  I  do  not 
think  the  Council  declares  in  that  sentence  that  revelation 
consists  'in  things  Divine,'  but  even  if  it  does,  then  all  w^e  can 
say  is,  that  every  statement  in  Scripture  is  Divine,  or,  w^hat 
comes  to  the  same,  is  the  Word  of  God — as  St.  Paul  himself 
asserts,  at  least  by  implication,  regarding  the  Scriptures 
certainly  of  the  Old  Testament,  if  not  also  of  some  of  the 
New,  iraa-a  ^pa<^r]  Oeoirveva-TO^; ,  If  every  scripture  is  Oeoirveva- 
T09  it  may  well  be  called  Divine. 

"As  regards  the  second  point,  the  Council  does  say  that 
the  supernatural  revelation  is  contained  in  the  written  books 
and  unwritten  Divine  traditions ;  but  concerning  these  same 
books  it  says  in  the  very  next  sentence,  that  the  church  does 
not  regard  them  as  sacred  and  canonical,  merely  because  they 
contain  this  revelation  without  error,  but  because,  having 
been  written  under  the  inspiration  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  they 
have  God  for  their  author,  and  as  such  have  been  handed 
down  to  the  church.  'Eos  vero  (libros)  ecclesia  pro  sacris  et 
canonicis  habet,  non  ideo  quod  sola  humana  industria  con- 
cinnati,  sua  deinde  auctoritate  sint  approbati,  nee  ideo 
dumtaxat,  quod  revelationem  sine  errore  contineant;  sed 
propterea  quod  Spiritu  Sancto  inspirante  conscripti,  Deimi 
habent  auctorem,  atque  ut  tales  ipsi  ecclesiae  traditi  sunt.' 
To  say,  therefore,  that  the  Divine  books  contain  the  revela- 
tion of  God,  and  even  without  any  error,  is  declared  by  the 
Council  itself  to  be  an  inadequate  description  of  their  sacred 
and  canonical  character.*     The  reason  is  manifest.     A  book 

*  See  Franz,  page  375  Thesis  IV. 


138  BISHOP    HEALY 

might  contain  the  whole  revelation  of  God,  and  contain  it 
without  error,  and  yet  not  be  at  all  an  inspired  book,  because 
inspiration  essentially  regards  the  writing  or  authorship  of 
the  book.  If  it  is  an  inspired  book,  God  is  its  author ;  it 
must  have  been  written  in  all  its  parts  under  the  guidance  and 
inspiration  of  the  Holy  Spirit  of  God,  so  much  so,  that  God 
becomes  responsible  for  every  single  statement  it  contains, 
and  therefore  quite  as  much  responsible  for  its  statements 
'in  matters  of  fact,'  as  for  its  statements  in  reference  to 
'faith  and  morals.'  All  these  truths  will  not  have  the  same 
intrinsic  importance  in  relation  to  each  other,  or  to  the 
economy  of  man's  redemption ;  but  they  are  all  divine  as  re- 
gards their  origin  and  their  authority. 

"And  now  this  leads  us  to  give,  in  conclusion,  a  very 
brief  explanation  of  the  nature  of  inspiration  as  taught  in 
all  Catholic  schools,  and  it  is  as  contained  in  the  writings  of 
the  Fathers,  and  of  all  our  eminent  theologians,  since  the, 
Council  of  Trent.  Catholic  teaching  on  this  point  has  be- 
come still  more  definite  and  dogmatic  since  the  definitions  of 
the  Coimcil  of  the  Vatican  already  referred  to. 

''The  points  of  Catholic  dogma  clearly  defined  are,  (a) 
that  God  is  the  author  of  all  the  canonical  books  of  the  Old 
and  New^  Testament,  (b)  that  these  books  have  been  written 
under  the  inspiration  of  the  Holy  Spirit  of  God,  (c)  and  hence 
the  entire  books  are  inspired.  The  second  of  these  points 
more  clearly  and  accurately  defines  the  meaning  of  the  first ; 
and  the  third  expresses  the  abiding  consequence  of  the  other 
two,  that  is,  the  inspiration  of  the  sacred  books  terminatwe, 
as  the  theologians  call  it. 

"God,  then,  is  defined  to  be  the  author  of  all  the  Sacred 
Scriptures,  because  they  were  written  under  the  inspiration 
of  His  Holy  Spirit.  Now,  what  is  meant  by  being  the  author 
of  a  book  in  this  sense?  It  must  mean  here,  as  it  means 
everywhere  else,  either  that  He  Himself  wrote  it,  as  He  wrote 
the  Tables  of  the  Law,  with  his  ow^n  finger,  which,  of  course, 
is  out  of  the  question ;  or  that  he  dictated  the  sacred  books 
word  for  word  to  the  inspired  penmen,  an  opinion  which  has 
been  held  by  few,  but  is  now  justly  and  generally  rejected ; 
or  finally,  as  a  minimum,  it  must  mean  according  to  the  use 


BISHOP    HEALY  139 

of  language,  that  He  directed  or  procured  the  writing  of  all 
these  sacred  books ;  that  He  suggested  to  the  sacred  writers 
all  the  mutter  to  be  written — res  et  sententias — even  that 
known  before,  and  finally  gave  them  such  constant,  ever 
watchful  assistance  in  the  composition  of  all  these  books  as 
to  insure  that  everything  which  He  wished  should  be  said, 
and  that  nothing  should  be  said  except  what  He  wished,  and 
hence  that  there  should  be  no  trace  of  falsehood  or  error,  for 
which  He,  the  principal  and  infallible  i\uthor  of  the  book, 
would,  in  that  absurd  hypothesis,  be  held  responsible.  The 
very  nature  of  Divine  authorship  requires  this  at  least ;  if  the 
instrumental  author  begin  to  write  motu  proprio,  it  is  in  no 
special  sense  God's  w^ork;  if  he  write  anything  which  he  is 
not  directed  to  write,  it  is  not  God's  work  so  far ;  and  if  there 
could  be  errors  or  mistakes  in  any  book  written  by  Divine 
authority,  God  could  never  claim  that  book  whole  and  entire, 
with  all  its  parts,  as  purety  and  simply  His  own — as  written 
in  its  entirety  under  the  inspiration  of  His  Holy  Spirit. 
Therefore,  the  Divine  authorship  of  the  Sacred  Books,  in 
the  sense  defined  by  the  Churchy  imperatively  requires  that 
as  a  minimum,  the  impulse  to  write  should  come  from  God, 
that  He  should  suggest  at  least  the  matter,  and  that  He 
should  preserve  the  sacred  writers  from  all  error,  which,  if  it 
were  possible,  would  not  be  the  error  of  man,  but  of  God. 
It  is  as  absurd  to  say  that  a  man  could  commit  sin  under  the 
impulse  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  as  to  say  that  the  sacred  writer 
could  write  error  under  the  inspiration  of  the  Holy  Ghost. 
Therefore,  as  it  is  de  fide  that  the  Sacred  Books,  whole  and 
entire,  were  written  under  the  inspiration  of  the  Holy  Ghost, 
it  follows,  at  least  as  a  conclusion  theologically  certain,  that 
everything  written  by  the  sacred  writers  is,  what  is  called 
in  Scripture,  and  by  the  Church,  and  by  the  Fathers,  and  by 
the  people,  verily  and  indeed  the  Word  of  God,  unmixed  with 
any  false,  or  erroneous,  or  merely  human  element. 

"This  doctrine,  regarding  the  nature  of  inspiration,  does 
not  imply  that  God  did  not,  in  most  cases,  leave  the  choice  of 
the  words  to  the  sacred  writer.  It  does  not  even  imply  that 
the  words  chosen  were  the  most  elegant,  or  most  appropriate, 
for  expressing  the  Divine  ideas  in  the  writer's  mind.     It  does 


140  CANON    DI    BARTOLO 

not  imply  the  adoption  of  the  graces  of  style,  nor  the  niceties 
of  grammar,  nor  the  exactness  in  scientific  or  rhetorical 
arrangement.  But  it  does  imply  that  the  words  must  be 
suitable  to  express  the  writer's  Divine  thoughts,  that  his 
language  must  be  intelligible,  and  that  the  arrangement  must 
not  be  such  as  will  necessarily  lead  the  readers  astray. 

"Again,  inspiration  does  not  exclude  antecedent  knowl- 
edge of  much  of  the  matter  to  be  written,  nor  labor  in  its 
acquisition,  provided  always  it  is  written  by  the  human 
author  of  the  sacred  Book,  not  motu  proprio,  but  in  virtue 
of  the  Divine  impulse,  consciously  or  unconsciously  followed, 
and  written  also  under  the  Divine  guidance,  lest  any  error 
might  creep  in,  of  which,  as  it  could  not  originate  from  God, 
He  could  not  accept  the  authorship  or  responsibility. 

''Neither  does  our  doctrine  on  inspiration  imply  that  it  is 
confined  to  the  autograph  of  the  sacred  writer.  Inspira- 
tion does  not,  terminative  sumpta,  consist  in  the  material 
book  as  such — in  the  handwriting,  the  ink,  and  the  vellum ; 
but  it  consists  in  the  book  as  a  series  of  signs,  with  a  definite 
objective  significance  for  the  mind  of  man:  and  hence  the 
inspired  books  remain,  although  the  autographs  have  all 
perished." 

Others  who  opposed  the  views  of  Newman  were  Brucker 
(La  Controverse  et  le  Contemporain) ,  and  Corluy  in  the  same 
periodical.  Later  Brucker  published  his  views  in  a  work 
entitled  "Questions  Actuelles  d'Ecriture  Sainte."  In  Ger- 
many Franz  Schmid  vigorously  opposed  Newman's  theory. 

In  1889  Salvatore  di  Bartolo  published  his  "I  Criteri 
Teologici."  This  was  placed  on  the  Index  of  prohibited 
books  by  the  decree  of  May  14,  189 1.  A  corrected  edition 
which  appeared  at  Rome  in  1904  is  permitted  to  be  read. 
The  most  widely  circulated  form  of  this  work  is  a  French 
edition  with  certain  additions  by'the  translator.  This  was 
made  from  the  proscribed  edition.  Di  Bartolo  aimed  to  bring 
about  a  union  between  the  Catholic  Church  and  all  those 
who  dissent  from  it  by  keeping  in  abeyance  everything  non 
essential  on  which  there  is  difference  of  view,  and  insisting 
only  on  the  things  that  are  clearly  revealed,  and  on  the  things 
of  common  belief  of  all  Christians.     Applying  this  theory  to 


CANON    DI    BARTOLO  141 

inspiration  he  says:  ''Inspiration  is  a  supernatural  assist- 
ance acting  on  the  intelligence  and  will  of  the  sacred  writer, 
and  causing  him  to  write  the  true  doctrine  in  things  of  faith 
and  morals,  and  true  facts  which  are  essentially  connected 
with  things  of  faith  and  morals;  and  to  write  other  things 
with  a  sincere  purpose  and  divine  commission  to  save  man- 
kind." 

Explaining  his  meaning  he  declares  inspiration  to  be  such 
a  co-operation  of  the  Holy  Ghost  that  the  whole  Scripture 
should  be  attributed  to  the  Holy  Ghost  as  its  author." 
Conceding  that  the  Church  has  defined  the  divine  author- 
ship, di  Bartolo  affirms  "that  the  Church  has  never  deter- 
mined the  constituent  elements  of  inspiration,  and  that 
theologians  are  not  agreed  as  to  its  nature."  Hence  this 
author  gives  a  very  wide  stretch  to  the  free  ground  in  this 
great  question.  The  substance  of  his  own  views  may  be 
summed  up  as  follows:  Inspiration  has  three  degrees.  In 
the  things  of  faith  and  morals  and  facts  essentially  therewith 
connected  the  highest  degree  of  inspiration  takes  place,  even 
at  times  extending  to  the  very  words.  Whenever  there  is  a 
doubt  of  the  degree  of  inspiration  the  presumption  is  in 
favor  of  the  biblical  expression  until  the  clearest  arguments 
force  us  to  admit  the  evidence  of  the  human  element.  In- 
spiration is  not  present  in  all  sentences,  neither  always  in  the 
forms  of  expression. 

The  least  degree  of  inspiration  is  present  in  the  acces- 
sories to  the  things  narrated  in  Scripture,  knd  here  inspira- 
tion does  not  guarantee  infallibility.  Here  therefore  not  all 
doubt,  equivocation,  and  error  are  excluded.  These  things 
are  not  to  be  said  to  the  common  people  who  are  unable  to 
make  the  necessary  distinctions;  but  di  Bartolo  believes  it 
not  irreverent  to  speak  of  an  error  in  the  material  part  of 
Scripture.  Such  opinion,  he  says,  offends  not  God,  for  the 
error  is  not  attributed  to  God,  but  to  his  secretary.  If  the 
Son  of  God  in  his  incarnation  had  natural  imperfections ;  if 
God  permitted  errors  gradually  to  creep  into  the  text  of  the 
Scriptures  as  they  were  preserved  by  men,  why  could  not 
God  permit  his  secretary  the  inspired  writer  to  commit  cer- 
tain defects  in  the  narration  of  accessory  things,  when  they 


142  OTHER   LIBERAL   VIEWS 

could  not  be  imputed  to  God,  but  to  the  writer  whom  God 
employed?  It  conflicts  not  with  inspiration  when  the 
writer  uses  old  documents,  therefore,  why  should  it  be  ex- 
cluded by  inspiration  that  a  writer  in  secondary  things  should 
commit  equivocations  ?  that  he  should  follow  popular  beliefs  ? 
that  he  should  fall  into  error?  God,  permitting  that  human 
weakness  should  be  manifested,  saved  intact  the  entire 
divine  message.  The  least  degree  of  inspiration  is  present  in 
things  non-religious  in  character,  and  here  the  human  ele- 
ment is  not  guaranteed  infallibility.  There  is  a  certain  in- 
spiration here ;  for  the  writer  had  a  special  commission  to  write 
for  the  salvation  of  men,  and  his  end  in  writing  was  good. 
Inspiration  extends  itself  to  all  the  sacred  writers  have  writ- 
ten ;  but  in  these  accessory  and  non-religious  things  it  is  the 
least  degree  of  inspiration,  w^hich  leaves  more  to  the  human 
factor.  Therefore  the  writer  being  by  nature  limited  and 
fallible,  he  may  in  these  secondary  things  err  and  doubt. 
To  the  non-religious  order  of  Scripture  pertain  geography, 
chronology,  natural  history,  physics,  defective  philosophy 
perhaps,  and  defects  in  literary  style. 

Though  di  Bartolo's  views  are  in  some  things  extreme, 
and  rightly  condemned,  there  is  every  evidence  that  he  wrote 
in  good  faith,  and  with  the  sole  purpose  of  seeking  the  truth. 

At  Turin  in  1892,  Canon  Berta  published  his  *'Dei  cinque 
libri  mosaici,"  wherein  he  defended  the  views  similar  to 
those  of  Lenormant. 

The  Bamabite  Semeria  (Revue  Biblique  1893,  P-  434) 
went  further,  and  declared  that  it  would  be  a  most  useful 
thing  for  the  Church  if  some  one  of  sufficient  ability  would 
separate  the  inspired  portions  from  the  uninspired  portions 
of  Holy  Writ. 

The  same  views  were  advocated  by  the  Bamabite  Paolo 
Savi  in  the '* Science  Catholique,"  1892 — 93.  Canon  Jules 
Didiot,  professor  at  Lille  in  **La  logique  surnaturelle  sub- 
jective," 1891,  rejected  the  absolute  infallibility  of  the  Scrip- 
tures, but  after  the  appearance  of  the  Bull  'Trovidentis- 
simus  Deus"  he  retracted  his  opinions  in  favor  of  the  more 
conserv^ative  opinion  in  his,  'Traite  de  la  Sainte  Ecriture 
d'apres  S.S.  Leon,  XIIL,  (Paris,  1894). 


MSGR.  d'hulst  148 

In  the  year  1893  a  little  before  the  appearance  of  the 
Bull  of  Leo  XIII.  Msgr.  D'Hulst,  Rector  of  the  free 
theological  faculty  of  Paris,  pubhshed  in  the  *'  Correspond - 
ant"  an  article  entitled  ''La  Question  biblique. "  In  this 
article  d'Hulst  takes  up  the  defense  of  Lenormant  on  the 
ground  that  the  placing  of  a  work  on  the  Index  is  not  of 
necessity  a  condemnation  of  its  doctrine.  After  enumerat- 
ing some  of  the  reasons  which  may  move  the  Congregation 
to  prohibit  a  book,  he  declares  that  the  ideas  of  Lenormant 
may  have  been  prohibited  for  the  reason  that  the  world  was 
not  ready  for  them.  He  declares  that  "The  hypothesis 
by  which  inspiration  is  extended  to  the  things  narrated  of 
the  origin  of  the  human  race,  in  such  wise  that  the  inspira- 
tion confers  not  infallibility  on  these  narrations,  but  only 
joins  doctrinal  and  moral  truth  to  them,  is  adopted  by  a 

certain  number  of  learned  and  orthodox  men 

Such  men  admit  that  there  may  be  in  the  Bible  propositions 
not  strictly  true.  God  is  not  responsible  for  these,  although 
he  is  the  Inspirer  of  the  whole  work.  The  reason  is  that  to 
reveal  is  one  thing ;  to  inspire,  another.  Revelation  is 
divine  teaching  which  must  be  true.  Inspiration  is  an 
impulse  which  determines  the  sacred  writer  to  write,  directs 
him,  moves  him,  watches  over  him.  In  the  hypothesis 
which  I  am  explaining  this  moving  (motio)  renders  him 
immune  from  error  in  faith  and  morals ;  they  believe  that 
this  preservation  does  not  go  further ;  they  believe  that  it 
has  the  same  limits  as  has  the  infallibility  of  the  Church.' 
The  promise  of  inerrancy  was  made  to  the  Church  for  the 
sole  end  that  it  might  with  certitude  promulgate  the  rule  of 
faith  and  morals.  It  is  true  that  the  Scriptures  are  not 
alone  infallible,  but  also  inspired.  Yet  although  inspiration 
extends  to  everything,  perhaps  it  confers  not  infallibility  on 
all  the  statements  of  the  inspired  writer;  perhaps  this 
privilege  is  restricted  to  the  things  of  faith  and  morals. 
Perhaps  the  other  statements  which  are  not  by  inspiration 
rendered  infallible,  are  only  employed  as  the  vehicle  of  the 
teaching  concerning  faith  and  morals.  It  may  be  that  God, 
the  Inspirer,  who  could  have  corrected  the  material  errors 
of  the  sacred  writer  judged  it  not  useful  to  do  this.  These 
are  the  opinions  of  the  liberal  school  (ecole  large). 


144  MSGR.  d'hulst 

''The  adherents  of  this  school  assert:  First,  that  the  best 
way  to  determine  the  effect  of  inspiration  is  to  inquire  into 
its  motive.  .  .  .  But  the  end  which  God  proposed  in 
dictating  the  Holy  Books  is  to  teach  man  what  he  should 
believe,  hope,  and  do,  that  he  may  bring  him  to  his  super- 
natural end.  Therefore  all  the  statements  of  Scripture 
which  conduce  to  this  end  must  be  divine  affirmations,  but 
as  to  other  things  there  seems  to  be  doubt. 

''Secondly,  the  Council  of  Trent  declared  the  Vulgate 
authentic,  but  only  in  things  of  faith  and  morals.  Therefore 
if  the  divine  authority  of  the  Vulgate  is  not  defined  except 
as  regards  the  things  of  faith,  the  authority  of  the  Holy 
Scripture  is  practically  restricted  within  the  same  limits. 
Why  should  it  not  be  theoretically  ? 

*'  Moreover,  the  Vatican  Council  renewing  the  decree  of 
the  Council  of  Trent  declares  the  true  sense  of  Scripture  to  be 
that  which  holy  Church  holds.  .  .  .  But  it  adds  that 
the  interpretation  of  which  it  speaks,  and  to  which  the  rules 
apply,  is  the  interpretation  in  things  of  faith  and  morals. " 

Speaking  of  Cardinal  Newman  d'Hulst  says:  ''Cardinal 
Newman  restricts  the  liberty  afforded  by  this  theory  to  the 
obiter  dicta.  This  timidity  may  readily  be  understood  if  we 
reflect  that  the  eminent  author  located  the  question  in  a 
very  dangerous  point ;  for  he  treats  of  the  object  or  extent 
of  inspiration.  Now  if  inspiration  is  of  limited  extent,  there 
are  uninspired  portions  of  Holy  Scripture.  This  is  a  new  and 
dangerous  formula,  which  it  is  difficult  to  bring  into  accord 
with  the  decrees  of  councils  and  the  teaching  of  tradition. 
Hence  it  is  evident  why  the  prudent  theologian  restricted  the 
application  to  fragments  merely  accessory.  This  difficulty 
is  greatly  lessened,  and  almost  vanishes  if  we  hold  the  total 
inspiration  of  Scripture,  but  in  such  a  sense  that  in  certain 
things  not  pertaining  to  faith  the  infallibility  be  restricted, 
which,  however  is  the  proper  effect  of  inspiration.  To  ex- 
empt from  infallible  inspiration  obiter  dicta  would  be  of  little 
use  to  solve  the  great  exegetical  difficulties.  .  .  . 
Wherefore  other  writers  diligently  considering  not  the  ex- 
tent of  inspiration,  but  the  effect  of  inspiration,  apply  the 
principle  in  a  wide  range  not  to  merely  accessory  things,  but 


MSGR.  d'hulst  145 

to  considerable  portions  of  Scripture ;  in  the  first  place  to  the 
portions  which  treat  of,  or  seem  to  treat  of  scientific  ques- 
tions, then  to  other  texts  of  greater  moment  and  extent 
which  have,  or  seem  to  have,  a  historical  character." 

Msgr.  d'Hulst  afiirms  the  sound  doctrine  concerning  the 
relation  of  the  Scriptures  to  the  natural  sciences :  '*  The 
Scriptures  do  not  convey  scientific  instruction,  and  therefore 
there  can  be  no  conflict.  The  Scriptures  speak  of  these 
matters  in  accordance  with  the  opinions  then  in  vogue; 
such  matters  are  not  written  for  their  own  sake,  but  for  a 
setting  of  religious  ideas." 

And  now  Msgr.  d'Hulst  comes  to  the  most  difficult 
question  of  all ;  the  question  which  Pere  Lagrange  has 
worked  into  his  famous  Methode  Historique ;  the  question 
which  divides  the  greatest  minds  in  the  Catholic  Church, 
namely:  May  we  apply  to  the  portions  of  Scripture  which 
are  historical  the  same  theory  which  without  detriment  to 
the  faith  we  apply  to  the  scientific  statements  of  the  Bible  ? 
Msgr.  d'Hulst  declares  this  to  be  the  axis  about  which  all 
future  Biblical  questions  will  revolve.  Indeed  were  it  not 
for  it  there  would  not  be  a  biblical  question.  The  doctrinal 
and  moral  parts  of  the  Bible  give  us  no  difficulty.  All  the 
world  accepts  the  principles  enunciated  above  concerning  the 
matters  of  natural  science  in  the  Bible ;  but  the  history  in 
the  Bible  is  the  source  of  the  greatest  difficulties. 

With  admirable  acumen,  Msgr.  d'Hulst  declares  that  if 
the  question  were  to  be  submitted  whether  the  historical 
parts  of  the  Bible  should  be  treated  in  the  same  manner  as 
the  scientific  parts  a  negative  answer  must  be  given.  "For 
although  we  may  deny  that  cosmology  is  taught  in  the  Bible 
no  man  may  in  any  way  imagine  that  history  is  not  taught. 
.  .  .  At  least  a  part  of  history  is  divinely  taught,  for 
revelation  itself  is  a  dogmatic  fact,  and  the  whole  series  of 
human  events  is  bound  up  with  revelation.  The  creation, 
the  primitive  state  of  man,  the  fall,  the  promise  of  a  Saviour, 
the  various  divine  covenants  and  the  signs  attesting  them, 
the  events  which  prepared  the  way  for  the  Messiah,  the  life 
itself  of  the  Saviour,  his  preaching,  his  death,  his  resurrec- 
tion, the  foundation  of  the  Church,  these  are  historical  facts. 

(10)   H.S. 


146  LAGRANGE 

If  these  are  false  all  religion  is  false.  If  they  are  not  inspired 
nothing  is  inspired.  If  the  inspired  writers  who  deliver 
them  are  not  by  inspiration  preserved  immune  from  error, 
inspiration  is  of  no  avail.  Therefore  the  question  is  not 
whether  there  is  history  in  the  Bible,  but  whether  all  the 
historical  facts  which  are  found  in  this  divine  collection  are 
revealed,  or  at  least  attested  by  inspiration." 

It  seems  to  us  that  the  principles  here  enunciated  prove 
the  historical  method  of  Lagrange  to  be  impossible.  And 
yet  Lagrange  himself  admits  these  principles.  Thus  we 
read  in  the  opening  paragraphs  of  Lecture  VI.  in  the 
"Methode  Historique:" 

''When,  in  the  previous  Lecture  on  the  authority  of  the 
Encyclical  Providentissimus  Deus,  I  applied  to  history  the 
same  principles  as  to  science,  the  thought  must  have  occurred 
to  you,  that  for  every  point  of  similarity  there  might  be  be- 
tween science  and  history,  viewed  as  matter  for  biblical 
criticism,  there  v/ere  many  more  points  of  difference.  Every 
kind  of  knowledge  has  its  own  rules  and  methods.  In  the 
first  place,  granted  that  we  may  hold  that  there  is  no  science 
in  the  Bible,  it  would  be  more  than  paradoxical  to  maintain 
that  the  Bible  contained  no  history,  seeing  that  the  Bible  is 
the  history  of  salvation.  Science,  moreover,  based  as  it  is 
upon  experiment  and  calculation,  is  naturally  outside  the 
sphere  of  the  greater  number  of  men  as  soon  as  it  goes  beyond 
the  mere  observation  of  natural  phenomena,  while  history, 
in  itself,  is  nothing  but  the  record  of  the  doings  of  men  as 
established  by  testimony.  If  in  late  years  it  has  seemed  to 
move  in  a  somewhat  mysterious  region,  it  is  simply  because 
of  the  attention  given  to  the  study  of  sources  which  calls  for 
specialized  knowledge  and  a  critically  trained  mind ;  but,  in 
itself,  history  is  but  the  record  of  what  eye-witnesses  have 
seen.  So  that  while  scientific  theories  like  our  own  could  not 
possibly  have  found  a  place  in  the  Bible  without  an  abso- 
lutely unnecessary  revelation,  and  without  doing  violence 
to  men's  minds,  on  the  other  hand,  no  supernatural  help  was 
needed  to  write  sound  history. 

"Hence  there  is  no  science  in  the  Bible,  although  through- 
out, an  elementary  knowledge  of  arithmetic  is  supposed,  for 


LAGRANGE  147 

that  is  well  within  the  range  of  man;  there  are  no  meta- 
physics in  the  Bible,  although  the  normal  use  of  the  intellect 
is  always  assumed;  there  is  much  history  in  the  Bible,  be- 
cause the  writing  of  history  is  familiar  to  all  people  who  have 
reached  the  same  stage  as  the  Israelites.  Now,  if  God  did 
not  reveal  to  His  chosen  people  any  scientific  or  metaphysical 
proposition,  at  that  time  beyond  the  range  of  their  mind, 
because  it  was  not  profitable  for  their  salvation,  we  have 
good  ground  for  holding  that  neither  did  He  reveal  to  them 
any  history  that  was  beyond  the  range  of  what  could  be  seen 
or  known  except  in  so  far  as  it  was  necessary  for  salvation. 
Hence,  and  this  is  a  further  difference,  we  have  no  hesitation 
in  placing  history,  that  is  to  say,  the  record  of  men's  deeds^ 
in  a  different  category  from  the  sciences  and  from  meta- 
physics, because  a  man's  salvation  is  inseparably  connected 
with  his  actions.  Thus  it  is  quite  possible  that  God  may 
have  made  a  revelation  of  history,  and  hence  it  is,  that  I 
wish  to  exclude  from  the  conclusions  which  follow,  all  that 
concerns  the  Fall  of  man." 

It  is  evident  to  all  that  there  is  an  illogical  sentence  in 
this  statement.  After  declaring  that  history  is  not  in  the 
category  of  science,  Lagrange  by  inference  places  it  in  the 
same  category  by  declaring :  "Now  if  God  did  not  reveal  to 
his  chosen  people  any  scientific  or  metaphysical  proposition, 
at  that  time  beyond  the  range  of  their  mind,  because  it  was 
not  profitable  for  their  salvation,  we  have  good  ground  for 
holding  that  neither  did  he  reveal  to  them  any  history  that 
was  beyond  the  range  of  what  could  be  seen  or  known,  ex- 
cept in  so  far  as  it  was  necessary  for  salvation." 

The  exact  opposite  should  be  the  logical  influence :  from 
the  fact  that  history  enters  more  intimately  into  the  very 
essence  of  revelation,  God  might  well  be  supposed  to  safe- 
guard it  more  especially,  lest  an  error  in  one  statement 
might  cast  doubt  on  others  more  essential. 

Msgr.  d'Hulst  rightly  affirms  that  it  is  indifferent  whether 
we  consider  certain  books  such  as  Ruth,  Job  and  others  to  be 
historical,  or  doctrinal  and  moral  treatises  presented  under 
the  form  of  history.  The  thing  is  uncertain  and  in  no  wise 
pertains  to  faith.     "A  more  difficult  question  is  presented  by 


148  MSGR.  d'hulst 

the  first  eleven  chapters  of  Genesis.  Certainly  they  should 
be  held  as  historical  were  it  not  that  grave  reasons  persuade 
us  that  we  have  to  deal  here  with  a  mythological  tradition 
of  the  most  ancient  oriental  people,  as  F.  Lenormant  shows. 
His  theories  indeed  seem  new  and  bold  in  the  Church.  That 
they  are  new  is  not  strange,  since  the  documents  of  which  he 
treats  were  only  lately  found;  but  they  are  not  more  bold 
than,  for  instance,  the  theory  of  St.  Augustine  concerning 
the  six  days  of  creation.  But  they  say:  'Errors  are  in- 
troduced into  the  Scripture.  Error  excludes  inspiration.' 
We  answer:  This  is  rashly  said.  Error  excludes  inspira- 
tion as  far  as  it  is  imputed  to  God,  not  in  as  far  as  it  is  com- 
mitted by  the  sacred  writer.  God  could  make  himself 
sponsor  of  all  that  goes  into  the  Scriptures;  but  also  God 
could  have  limited  inspiring  action  to  these  effects :  to  move 
the  writer  to  write ;  to  reveal  to  him  certain  truths ;  to  direct 
him,  and  preserve  him  from  all  error  in  things  of  faith  and 
morals;  and  yet,  when  the  writer  employs  doctmients,  not 
enter  to  correct  their  imperfections  and  less  accurate  state- 
ments, except  where  they  were  contrary  to  the  doctrinal  and 
moral  end  of  inspiration.  .  .  .  There  has  always  been 
admitted  the  human  element  subordinate  to  the  divine  ele- 
ment in  the  composition  of  the  sacred  books.  All  the  com- 
mentators and  all  the  Fathers  of  the  Church  have  pointed 
out  the  differences  of  style,  of  genius,  and  of  intellectual 
equipment  of  the  different  sacred  writers.  If  the  Holy 
Ghost  could  permit  such  defects,  why  not  defects,  in  his- 
torical narratives  which  pertain  not  to  faith  ?  If  the  infalli- 
bility which  is  founded  on  inspiration  be  restricted  to  re- 
ligious truths,  there  will  be  removed  the  gravest  difficulties 
which  are  moved  against  the  Scriptures." 

With  true  Catholic  spirit  Msgr.  d'Hulst  proclaimed  that 
he  submitted  his  opinions  to  the  infallible  authority  of  the 
Church,  whose  voice  he  was  ready  to  obey.  After  the  con- 
demnation of  Lenormant 's  book  many  other  treatises  had 
been  published  which  advocated  analogous  views.  Rome 
had  kept  silent;  and  Msgr.  d'Hulst  interpreted  this  silence 
as  a  liberty  to  speak  his  views,  always  in  subjection  to  the 
Church. 


LEO  XIII.  149 

The  silence  of  which  this  writer  spoke  was  soon  broken. 
In  the  same  year  Pope  Leo  XIII.  pubHshed  his  Bull,  **Pro- 
videntissimus  Deus, "  in  which  the  principles  of  Msgr. 
d'Hulst  are  tacitly  condemned. 

True  to  his  profession  Msgr.  d'Hulst  and  his  associate 
faculty  signified  their  obedience  to  the  Soverign  Pontiff. 
They  begin  their  letter  thus ;  "  The  Rector  and  professors  of 
the  canonical  theological  Faculty  of  the  University  of  Paris, 
after  carefully  reading  and  meditating  on  the  encyclical 
letter  *  Pro  v.  Deus, '  declare  themselves  prepared  with  a 
willing  mind  to  accept  and  obey  all  that  Your  Holiness 
therein  teaches,  commands,  and  advises,  especially  con- 
cerning the  effect  of  inspiration  which  extends  itself  to  all 
the  parts  of  all  the  canonical  books  so  that  it  excludes  all 
error." 

Against  Msgr.  d'Hulst's  article  Jaugey  wrote  in  **La 
Science  Catholique, "  1892-93,  and  Brucker  in  the  *'  Etudes, " 
1893.  Jacquier,  recognizing  that  the  historical  difficulties 
had  brought  about  the  new  concept  of  inspiration,  suggested 
that  the  adherents  of  the  ''new  exegesis"  should  collect 
all  the  scientific,  chronological,  and  historical  difficulties. 
The  conservative  theologians  should  then  attempt  their 
solution ;  and  perhaps  thus  concessions  might  be  made  on 
both  sides,  and  the  points  of  difference  lessened.  This  is 
the  wisest  advice,  but  it  is  a  great  undertaking,  and  still 
awaits  men  capable  of  accomplishing  it. 

In  a  letter  to  the  Archbishops,  Bishops  and  Clergy  of 
France  under  date  of  Sept.  8,  1899,  Pope  Leo  XIII.  reitera- 
ted with  great  earnestness  his  condemnation  of  the  liberal 
theories  of  inspiration:  ''Venerable  Brethren,  regarding  the 
study  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  we  again  call  your  attention  to 
the  instructions  which  we  have  given  in  our  encyclical 
" Providentissimus  Deus"  which  we  desire  that  professors 
should  make  known  to  their  pupils,  and  add  the  necessary 
explanations.  Let  them  warn  (their  pupils)  against  the 
alarming  tendencies  which  seek  to  thrust  themselves  into 
the  interpretation  of  the  Bible,  and  which  if  they  prevail 
will  soon  ruin  inspiration  and  the  supernatural  order. 
Under  the  specious  pretext  of  removing  from  the  adver- 


150  LAGRANGE 

saries  of  revelation  arguments  which  seems  irrefutable 
against  the  authenticity  and  veracity  of  the  Holy  Books 
certain  Catholic  writers  have  thought  well  to  accept  their 
arguments  on  their  side.  Pursuant  to  these  strange  and 
dangerous  tactics  they  have  labored  with  their  own  hands 
to  make  breaches  in  the  walls  of  the  city  which  they  have  a 
mission  to  defend.  In  our  aforesaid  encyclical  and  in 
another  document  (Letter  to  The  General  of  the  Friars 
Minor)  we  have  justly  dealt  with  the  dangerous  temerities. 
While  encouraging  our  exegetes  to  keep  abreast  of  progress 
and  criticism,  we  have  firmly  maintained  the  principles 
sanctioned  by  the  traditional  authority  of  Fathers  and 
Councils  and  renewed  in  our  days  by  the  Council  of  the 
Vatican." 

It  is  clear  to  all  that  the  Supreme  Pontiff  in  these  utter- 
ances has  in  mind  the  theories  taught  by  Lenormant,  Loisy, 
and  Lagrange,  and  thought  possible  by  Msgr.  d'Hulst. 

In  the  Revue  Biblique  of  1896-97  Pere  Lagrange  publish- 
ed a  series  of  articles  entitled  ''The  Inspiration  of  the  Holy 
Books."  His  theory  is  spread  out  over  a  great  mass  of 
words,  and  often  obscurely  enunciated,  but  we  may  gather 
from  it  the  following  principles.  "God  teaches  all  that  is 
taught  in  the  Bible ;  but  he  teaches  nothing  except  what  is 
taught  by  the  inspired  writer,  and  the  inspired  writer  teaches 
nothing  except  what  he  intends  (by  his  writing)  to  teach." 
Lagrange  calls  this  a  very  simple  theory,  declaring  that  thus 
inspiration  does  not  change  the  sense  of  terms,  nor  the 
character  of  propositions,  nor  the  species  of  literature  to 
which  the  books  belong.  It  is  only  by  studying  these  that 
we  may  come  at  the  idea  and  intention  of  the  author.  The 
illustrations  given  to  prove  this  principle  seem  to  us  puerile 
and  illogical.  Lagrange  cites  the  sentence  from  the  Psalms: 
"  There  is  no  God, "  as  an  evidence  of  a  statement  which  the 
author  did  not  wish  to  teach,  and  as  therefore  a  proof  that 
the  author  teaches  only  what  he  wishes  to  teach.  Issues 
are  confused  here.  No  man  believes  that  every  sentence  in 
the  Bible,  without  regard  to  whose  utterance  it  be,  or  its  con- 
text, is  true.  In  such  absurd  supposition  Christ  would  be 
a  malefactor,  a  blasphemer,  and  God  the  Father  would  give 


LAGRANGE  151 

place  to  Baal.  But  there  is  no  logical  connection  between 
these  simple  self-evident  facts  and  a  system  that  is  pro- 
pounded in  order  to  allow  its  author  later  to  say  that  the 
primitive  history  of  the  Bible  is  closely  allied  to  myths. 
Thus  he  continues: 

''On  the  other  hand,  no  one  will  deny  that  not  all  that 
appears  to  be  historical  is  really  historical ;  and  so  I  need  not 
insist  upon  the  now  generally  accepted  and  perfectly  simple 
theory — so  simple  indeed  that  I  can  hardly  claim  as  my  own 
the  words  which  express  it — to  the  effect  that  the  value  of 
statements  seemingly  affirmative  or  negative  depends  en- 
tirely upon  the  style  of  literary  production  in  which  such 
apparently  categorical  statements  appear.  The  first  thing 
to  be  done  is  to  determine  the  various  literary  styles  found 
in  the  Bible  and  presenting  the  appearance  of  history. 
Catholic  sentiment  rightly  shrinks  from  the  use  of  the  word 
'myth,'  but  between  myth  and  history  there  lies  a  very  wide 
field.  Let  us  examine,  then,  the  different  forms  of  literary 
production  known  to  the  ancients,  so  as  to  find  out  how 
many  of  them  the  Bible  contains,  in  order  to  be  able  to 
estimate  the  true  character  of  the  expression  used. 

"Can  it  be  said  that  there  are  myths  in  the  Bible?  The 
very  idea  jars  on  the  ordinary  mind,  and  it  will  not  allow 
the  word  to  be  uttered.  A  few  Catholic  writers,  daily  grow- 
ing more  numerous,  prefer  to  draw  a  distinction. 

"Naturally  they  are  not  anxious  to  retain  the  word  if  it 
gives  pain.  But  they  find  its  use  convenient  to  express  the 
likeness — at  least  the  external  likeness —  there  is  between 
myths  and  primitive  history;  only,  they  carefully  add  that 
the  mythological  elements  found  in  the  Bible  have  been 
carefully  'stripped  of  any  polytheistic  tinge,  and  are  only 
used  to  express  lofty  religious  ideas.'  The  phrase  is  that  of 
Dom  Hildebrand  Hopfi,  a  Benedictine,  used  in  a  pamphlet 
directed  against  the  rationalistic  methods  of  the  higher 
critics.* 

"No  one,  as  far  as  I  know,  has  attempted  to  analyze  this 
statement  or  any  equivalent  one,  so  that  the  popular  mind, 

*  Hopfl,  Die  hoehere  Bibelkritik,  Paderborn,  1902,  p.  63.  Cf.  Revue 
Btbhque,  1902,  p.  603. 


152  LAGRANGE 

is  uneasy  and  not  favorably  disposed.  Speaking  for  myself, 
I  think  it  would  be  well  definitely  to  put  the  word  aside,  on 
the  ground  that  words — which  in  themselves  are  of  little 
importance — should  only  be  used,  in  the  sense  assigned  to 
them  by  general  use.  We  are  accustomed  to  associate  the 
word  'myth'  with  the  idea  of  a  false  or  even  childish  religion. 
Let  us  leave  the  word  alone,  and  try  and  reach  the  root  of  the 
matter. 

"We  may  take  as  an  example  the  story  of  Lot's  wife, 
changed  into  a  pillar  of  salt,  in  circumstances  with  which 
you  are  familiar.  The  passage  is  quite  definite:  'and  his 
wife  looking  behind  her,  was  turned  into  a  pillar  of  salt.' 
(Gen.  XIX.  26)  To  imderstand  its  full  meaning  you  should 
have  seen  the  locality.  To  the  south  of  the  Dead  Sea,  on  the 
western  side,  there  lies  a  long  hill,  resembling  a  whale  cast 
ashore.  It  is  an  inexhaustible  salt  mine,  and  supplies  all  the 
homes  of  Jerusalem.  On  the  side  of  the  sea,  by  erosion  or 
by  some  other  geological  phenomena,  blocks  have  been 
formed  which  look  like  statues.  There  has  always  been  at 
least  one  for  the  tradition,  which  now  no  longer  speaks  of  the 
wife  of  Lot,  but  of  bint  Lout — the  daughter  of  Lot.  Now, 
ask  those  who  are  interested  in  folklore  or  mythology — ask 
yourselves,  ask  your  own  common-sense  and  your  conscience. 
There  can  be  no  doubt  what  the  answer  will  be.  Were  we  to 
find  this  phrase  elsewhere  than  in  the  Bible,  we  should  simply 
say  that  popular  imagination  had  personified  a  thing,  and 
having  found  in  some  block  of  salt  a  human  likeness,  con- 
nected it  with  the  memory  of  a  woman  who  disappeared  in 
some  great  catastrophe.  To  be  changed  into  stone  is  gener- 
ally a  punishment,  as  in  the  case  of  Niobe."  (Methode 
Historique,  VI.) 

The  falsity  of  Lagrange's  principle  must  be  evident  to  all. 
We  may  concede  that  God  is  responsible  for  all  that  is 
taught  in  the  Bible,  without  committing  God  to  a  solid  firma- 
ment, a  geocentric  system,  etc. ;  for  these  things  are  not 
taught  in  the  Bible.  The  language  of  a  people  was  accepted 
to  express  truth  without  affirming  or  denying  their  ideas  on 
scientific  phenomena.  But  when  Lagrange  affirms  that  the 
inspired   writer  teaches   nothing   except   what   he   wishes 


LAGRANGE  153 

to  teach,  the  statement  is  evidently  false.  Many  prophets 
uttered  prophecies  which  were  sealed  for  ages  after  they 
wrote.  In  many  cases  the  inspired  writers  did  not  com- 
prehend the  full  sense  of  what  they  wrote.  The  typical 
sense  of  Holy  Scripture  is  a  legitimate  sense,  and  yet  the 
human  writers  did  not  know  it  .  Will  any  man  say  that 
Moses  knew  that  the  brazen  serpent  in  the  desert  was  a  type 
of  the  Crucified  Saviour? 

Lagrange  next  declares  that  scientific  criticism  was  satis- 
fied the  moment  the  principle  was  conceded  that  the  Scrip- 
tures spoke  according  to  appearances.  He  then  asks :  ^'May 
we  apply  the  same  principle  to  the  historical  books?"  All 
his  subsequent  argument, all  his  illustrations  are  in  defense  of 
an  affirmative  answer  to  this  question.  As  we  have  before 
stated,  he  makes  some  restrictions  of  his  theory.  There  are 
some  strictly  revealed  historical  facts,  as  for  instance  the 
fall  of  man.  Thus  he  declares  in  his  VI.  Lecture  of  the 
M^thode  Historique : 

"But  it  is  quite  evident  that  the  first  chapters  of  the  Bible 
are  not  a  history  of  mankind,  nor  even  of  one  of  its  branches, 
for  the  simple  reason  that  we  could  with  difficulty  find  one 
fact  for  every  thousand  years,  and  even  then  we  should  not 
know  where  to  place  it. 

''You  may  object  that  you  are  anxious  to  retain  those 
first  chapters  as  so  many  landmarks  in  the  history  of  the  con- 
tinuity of  religion.  Very  good;  but  we  must  bear  in  mind 
that  that  is  what  they  are,  for  their  only  importance  is  that 
of  fingerposts  along  this  wide  waste.  But  let  us  take  care  to 
recognize  their  true  character.  You  will  agree  with  me  when 
I  say  that  among  those  persons  there  are  perhaps  some  names 
of  peoples :  if  I  go  so  far  as  to  suggest  names  of  towns,  you 
will  recall  Sidon  to  mind.  That  being  so,  why  not  allow 
that  among  these  fragments  there  are  also  names  which 
merely  stand  for  an  impersonal  progress  of  mankind, 
lost  memories,  the  source  of  which  no  one  knows,  occupying 
in  history  the  same  relative  position  as  the  ether  with  which 
we  fill  space,  without  fully  realizing  what  it  does,  simply 
because  we  must  put  something  between  the  starry 
spheres  ? 


154  LAGRANGE 

"The  very  fact  that  nothing  so  restrained  is  found  any- 
where else,  that  mythology  proper  is  excluded,  itself  suffices 
to  guard  from  error  anyone  who  seeks  to  see  things  as  they 
really  are.  These  characteristics,  taken  by  themselves, 
would  suffice  to  show  forth  the  influence  of  monotheism,  and 
that  all  is  in  keeping  with  the  dignity  of  the  dogma  of  in- 
spiration. 

"When  I  began,  I  said  that  I  placed  the  history  of  Orig- 
inal Sin  on  one  side.  Not  that  I  desire  to  affirm  the  his- 
toricity of  all  the  details  of  the  account ;  on  that  subject  I 
have  elsewhere  clearly  expressed  my  mind.*  But  some 
might  perhaps  be  tempted  to  conclude,  from  the  ideas  I 
have  been  developing,  that  the  essential  fact  itself  cannot 
have  been  handed  down  by  tradition.  I  do  not  think  that 
follows  from  the  premises.  I  have  endeavored  to  draw  a 
distinction  between  the  details  and  the  core  of  stories  which 
may  be  handed  down  most  faithfully  for  centuries  in  the 
most  varied  surroundings,  everywhere  undergoing  some 
transformation  because  it  is  everywhere  tinged  with  bor- 
rowed colors,  yet  remaining  everywhere  recognizable. 

"The  study  of  religious  histories,  and  particularly  of 
primitive  histories,  has  familiarized  folklorists  with  this 
fact.  There  seems  to  me,  therefore,  no  impossibility  what- 
ever in  the  transmission  of  the  accotmt  of  the  Fall  from 
generation  to  generation  for  thousands  of  years. 

"But  even  supposing  such  transmission  to  be  impossible, 
dato,  non  concesso,  we  have  only  to  see  whether  Original  Sin, 
which  evades  any  strict  historical  proof,  is  or  is  not  part  of 
the  divine  revelation.  It  is  quite  certain  that  it  is  included 
in  revelation.  The  conclusion  therefore  is  that  it  has  been 
revealed.  And  its  revelation  seems  quite  what  might  be 
expected,  considering  its  capital  importance,  and  its  neces- 
sary connection  with  Redemption.  If  the  dogma  involves 
as  a  necessary  consequence  the  unity  of  the  human  race, 
our  reasoning  will  be  the  same.  And  really  I  fail  to  see  that 
in  this  matter  ,we  are  all  awkwardly  placed.  History  is 
silent;  so  there  can  be  no  objection  from  that  quarter. 

*  Revue  Bibhque,  1897,  p.  341  seq. 


LAGRANGE  155 

Natural  science  brings  against  it  the  difference  of  races.  It 
was  perhaps  somewhat  of  a  difficulty,  and  is  perhaps  a 
difficulty  even  now,  for  those  who  maintain  the  immutability 
of  species.  But  if  moderate  evolution  tends  to  predominate 
science,  I  should  be  much  surprised  if  it  were  not  able  to 
explain  this  phenomenon  by  its  own  principles. 

"On  account  of  the  Church's  definition,  I  believe  in 
Original  Sin  according  to  the  Church's  meaning ;  but  ab- 
stracting from  this  dogmatic  point,  based  upon  the  tmshake- 
able  foundation  of  revelation,  there  can  be  no  objection  to 
assigning  primitive  history  its  true  character,  even  though 
it  may  not  have  been  sufficiently  understood  by  the  men  of 
bygone  days." 

Lagrange  divides  historical  books  into  three  classes: 
The  romance,  history  proper,  and  primitive  history.  The 
romance  is  a  creation  of  the  imagination,  and  may  be  the 
means  of  inculcating  truth  or  falsehood.  Strict  history  has 
a  certain  fallible  latitude  in  details  without  ceasing  to  be  true. 
Primitive  history  holds  a  middle  place  between  romance  and 
real  history:  "No  ancient  people  has  solved  the  mystery 
of  its  origin.  There  are  certain  annals  which  are  the 
foundation  of  history,  and  there  are  legends.  In  the  latter 
case  if  a  historian  reproduces  the  narrations  current  in  his 
day,  to  preserve  them  to  future  generations,  he  gives  them 
for  what  they  are  worth.  Everyone  is  familiar  with  this 
kind  of  history.  For  example,  it  is  well  known  that  to  indi- 
cate the  origin  of  different  peoples  men  derive  them  from 
an  eponymic  hero.  The  Dorians  have  as  ancestor  Dorus; 
the  Phoenicians,  Phoenix.  The  method  deceives  no  one, 
there  is  therein  no  properly  called  affirmation.  Men  have 
only  wished  to  reduce  the  confused  questions  of  origins 
to  a  certain  order." 

Lagrange  believes  that  an  imaginative  historical  narra- 
tive, provided  it  teach  a  true  lesson,  may  have  place  in  the 
Scripture.  He  cites  the  Book  of  Tobias.  Whatever  we  may 
say  of  the  example  chosen,  certain  it  is  that  the  principle  is 
applicable.  Even  though  we  hold  that  Job  is  a  historical 
personage,  no  one  will  deny  that  the  substance  of  the  book 
is  the  creation  of  an  inspired  imagination  to  inculcate  a  great 
moral  lesson. 


156  LAGRANGE 

Of  course  the  chief  place  in  the  historical  books  of  the 
Bible  is  held  by  history  properly  so  called.  But  even  here 
Lagrange  declares  that  the  inspired  writers  did  not  affirm 
the  precision  of  facts  and  words  "avec  la  demiere  acribie. " 
Absolute  exactness  in  all  details  is  not  in  the  nature  of  his- 
tory ;  the  inspired  writers  reproduced  the  substantial  truths 
of  words  and  facts. 

This  part  of  Lagrange's  theory  pleases  every  right- 
minded  scholar.  Certain  modal  differences  in  the  Evan- 
gelists are  well  explained  by  this  theory.  But  venerium 
in  Cauda. 

Lagrange  comes  to  the  third  application  with  a  certain 
timid  hesitation:  '*But  the  history  of  origins,  this  strange 
history  where  the  narration  of  facts  and  the  uncertain 
legend  jostle  each  other  {se  coudoient)  in  close  contact,  if 
(such  history)  enters  into  the  Bible,  how  shall  we  recognize 
it  there?  How  discern  the  true  from  the  false ?  The  imagi- 
native narration  and  the  parable  teach  no  fact ;  real  history 
teaches  all  facts ;  but  (in  primitive  history)  where  lies  the 
truth?  How  may  we  arrive  at  certitude?  And  most  of 
all  in  this  mixture  what  becomes  of  the  divine  illumina- 
tion? the  infallible  judgment,  judicium  infallibile  de  acceptis? 

'^Indeed  it  is  a  most  delicate  question,  but  we  can  not 
draw  back.  A  difficulty  encompasses  us  on  all  sides.  Let 
us  endeavor  to  solve  it  after  having  implored  light. 

^'In  the  first  place  I  ask:  In  what  consists  this  infallible 
judgment  when  there  is  question  of  a  work  of  the  imagina- 
tion or  a  parable?  The  facts  related  have  no  objective 
reality ;  they  have  no  purpose  except  to  present  a  lesson ;  to 
present  a  truth  under  the  convenient  form,  as  the  parable 
of  Lazarus,  or  the  Canticle  of  Canticles.  The  same  holds 
in  our  hypothesis;  (primitive  history)  aims  to  present  a 
truth,  nothing  but  a  truth  in  the  most  apt  manner,  whether 
it  be  -a  simple  affirmation  or  the  adapting  of  an  ancient 
legend  to  national  forms.  But  how  shall  we  discern?  Is  it 
proven  that  we  must  effect  this  discernment  so  quickly  and 
easily?  Is  the  Scripture  so  clear  as  some  protestants  pre- 
tend ?  On  the  contrary  is  it  not  of  faith  that  it  is  obscure  ? 
We  know  that  a  parable  declares  the  existence  of  no  object- 


LAGRANGE  157 

ive  entity.  Do  we  always  know  when  we  are  dealing  with 
a  parable  ?  Some  speak  of  the  parable  of  Lazarus ;  others 
believe  it  to  be  real  history.  .  .  .  The  same  is  true  of 
Tobias,  Judith,  Jonas.  If  therefore  God  leaves  us  uncertain 
whether  Judith  be  true  history,  why  could  he  not  leave  us 
in  the  same  incertitude  when  there  is  question  of  distin- 
guishing the  various  elements  which  compose  a  book?  Who 
shall  decide  the  question?  The  Church  as  a  final  resort; 
exegetes  in  the  first  attempt,  as  humble  servants  of  the 
Church." 

After  attempting  to  find  proof  for  his  system  in  the  fact 
that  Fathers  and  theologians  have  admitted  allegories  and 
metaphors  in  the  first  chapter  of  Genesis,  Lagrange  continues  : 
"  Having  established  these  preliminaries  we  definitively  ask: 
Is  primitive  history  found  in  the  Bible  with  the  same  literary 
characteristics  as  among  other  peoples,  save  only  that  it  is 
the  medium  of  an  infallible  teaching?"  It  is  equivalent  to 
say :  Is  the  history  of  Noah  and  his  sons  to  be  placed  on  the 
same  plane  as  the  legend  of  Romulus  and  Remus  ? 

Lagrange  answers  his  question:  '*  Here  is  our  conclusion: 
There  exists  in  the  Bible  a  primitive  history,  the  basis  of 
which  is  guaranteed  by  divine  truth ;  but  certain  circum- 
stances may  be  considered  either  as  metaphors  and  alle- 
gories ;  or  a  Hebrew  accommodation  of  the  oral  tradition. 
These  circumstances  are  more  the  clothing  of  the  truth  than 
the  truths  contemplated  in  the  teaching,  and  in  interpret- 
ing one  may  occupy  himself  less  with  their  material  object 
than  with  their  relation  to  the  principal  truth  taught.  But 
when  the  sacred  writer  employes  documents  or  uncertain 
oral  traditions  he  has  the  guidance  of  the  infallible  judg- 
ment. The  judgment  preserves  him  from  all  formal  error  in 
his  statements,  and  assures  the  fitness  of  what  may  be  called 
national  or  popular  metaphors  to  render  correctly  his  proper 
teaching.  I  distinguish  between  the  foundation  and  certain 
circumstances  which  have  place  in  all  primitive  history; 
and  I  say  that  the  foundation  of  primitive  biblical  history  is 
always  true.  But  if  even  the  foundation  of  the  primitive 
history  of  other  peoples  may  be  false,  why  make  an  ex- 
ception in  favor  of  the  Bible?     It  is  simply  on  account  of 


158  LAGRANGE 

the  divine  truth,  because  the  Bible  is  inspired.  ...  It 
is  most  reasonable  to  ascribe  such  action  to  God,  and  to  hold 
that  he  teaches  us  a  true  history,  whatever  be  the  means 
chosen  by  him  to  deliver  it  to  us.  He  could  have  taught 
us  all  the  circumstances  with  the  same  certitude,  and  we  are 
disposed  always  to  believe  them  true,  except  when  an 
examination  of  the  text  shows  us  that  the  writer  did  not 
intend  them  as  true  history.  .  .  .  For  example,  if  it  be 
proven,  as  M.  Oppert  alleges,  on  whom  I  leave  the  responsi- 
bility, that  the  ages  of  the  patriarchs  are  artificial  reductions 
of  Chaldean  epochs,  it  is  evident  that  the  man  who  made 
this  mathematical  operation  has  not  pretended  to  write 
history,  and  does  not  give  us  as  history  the  result  of  his  cal- 
culations. He  has  only  wished  to  supply  the  defect  of 
positive  chronology.  Our  rule  shall  be  to  accept  as  true 
all  that  the  author  delivers  as  such,  substance  and  circum- 
stances. We  shall  always  consider  the  foundation  to  be 
true  history ;  and  we  shall  never  cast  doubt  on  the  circum- 
stances except  when  we  are  persuaded  thereto  by  what  we 
believe  to  have  been  the  intention  of  the  author. "  Revue 
Biblique  1896  pp.  510  et  seqq. 

Lagrange  has  made  many  applications  of  his  theory: 
''Berosus  tells  how  the  fish -god  Oannes,  by  a  series  of 
apparitions,  led  men  on  to  civilization ;  then  he  enumerates 
kings  with  very  long  and  empty  reigns.  The  Bible  is  more 
serious,  is  closer  to  truth,  and,  I  venture  to  say,  closer  to 
history.  On  going  back  in  thought  to  the  beginnings  of  the 
race,  the  historical  deeds  of  individuals  entirely  escape  us, 
though  we  do  possess  the  elements  at  least  of  the  history  of 
civilization ;  in  other  words,  the  progress  it  has  made,  and  the 
great  discoveries  which  have  led  it  on  to  the  point  reached. 
When  the  Bible  tells  us  that  the  arts  developed  little  by 
little,  that  nomadic  life  gradually  assumed  its  own  general 
characteristics,  different  from  those  of  town  life,  that  men 
did  not  always  play  the  kinnor  and  flute,  nor  work  brass  and 
iron.  ...  I  suppose  anthropology  recognizes  it  to  be 
quite  correct,  and  that  it  is  impossible  otherwise  to  conceive 
the  beginning  and  progress  of  civilization. 


LAGRANGE  159 

''But  can  that  be  said  to  constitute  history,  duly  noted 
and  handed  down?  I  do  not  think  so,  the  reason  being 
that  history,  or  rather  what  we  mean  by  real  history,  de- 
mands some  knowledge  of  the  circumstances,  or  at  least  of 
the  time  and  place.  The  Bible,  of  course,  cites  proper 
names.  But,  as  I  pointed  out  at  the  beginning,  that  is  not 
enough,  because  those  proper  names  are  given  in  a  Hebrew 
form  which  is  not  their  own ;  and  besides,  what  is  the  value 
of  a  proper  name,  of  which  the  form  has  undergone  change, 
in  the  midst  of  such  a  vast  expanse  of  time?  And  if  the 
syllables  do  not  correspond  to  syllables,  nor  yet,  doubtless, 
the  sense  to  the  original  sense,  what  is  there  left  of  the  his- 
torical setting  of  the  fact?  Can  anyone  see  therein  an  his- 
torical reality  which  involves  the  truthfulness  of  the  sacred 
writer?  To  what  extent  is  it  of  faith  that  Jobal  invented 
music  ? 

''And  yet,  those  proper  names  are  a  most  interesting 
study.  They  often  seem  to  me  to  be  the  very  name  of  the 
object  invented,  thus  perhaps  witnessing  to  a  marked  de- 
gree the  admirable  wisdom  of  the  biblical  writer.  Could 
anything,  in  fact,  be  more  restrained,  prudent,  and  soimd 
than  the  statement  that  this  or  that  art,  known  in  our  own 
day,  had  a  beginning,  that  music  was  invented  by  a  musician  ? 
It  is  a  great  virtue  to  be  able  to  say  nothing  when  you  know 
nothing.  It  called  for  much  more  than  that,  to  put  an 
obstacle  in  the  way  of  the  Greeks;  though  they,  too,  were 
well  acquainted  with  this  elementary  method. 

''Let  me  give  you  some  examples  found  in  Pliny.*  Klos- 
ter  invented  the  distaff  (/cXcoa-rrip,  distaff) ;  Staphylos  (o-ra- 
(jivXij  bunch  of  grapes)  mingled  water  and  wine.  The  oar 
was  discovered  in  two  places  —  the  handle  at  Kopae 
U(07nj  handle)  and  the  blade  at  Plataea  (TrXaTtj  fiat).  Or  it 
may  even  take  the  form  of  a  genealogy:  thus,  according  to 
Philo  of  Byblos,  fire  is  descended  from  three  brothers  named 
Light,  Fire,  and  Flame.  It  is  all  true  enough,  and  deceives 
no  one.  Turn  to  the  first  story  we  have  in  the  Bible.  I 
pass  over  the  name  of  Abel,  which  probably  means  shep- 

*  Hist.  Nat.,  vii.  57  Cf.  Etudes  sur  les  religions  s^mitiques. 


160  LAGRANGE 

herd.  The  first  town  is  called  Henoch,  derived  from  a 
word  meaning  dedication.  All  have  heard  of  the  trumpet 
of  Jubilee,  jobel:  jobel  in  Phoenician  means  ram:  the  connec- 
tion between  the  two  is  very  natural;  the  ram's  horn  was 
used  as  a  musical  instrument.  Can  we  wonder  that  Jabal  was 
the  father  of  shepherds,  and  Jobal  the  father  of  musicians  ? 
The  name  Cain  means  blacksmith  in  Arabic;  and  it  was 
Tubal-Cain  who  was  the  first  maker  of  musical  instruments. 
I  do  not  seek  to  lower  the  Bible  by  making  this  analysis ; 
on  the  contrary,  I  think  it  works  out  to  its  honour. 

"It  was  quite  out  of  the  question  to  write  real  history, 
and  yet  is  was  of  importance  to  show  by  a  continuous  chain 
of  evidence  the  unity  of  the  history  of  salvation.  The  Bible 
avoids  absurd  or  obscene  accounts ;  there  is  no  pretence  of 
ignoring  sin,  but  sin  receives  its  due  punishment,  and  is  not 
glorified,  as  though  it  changed  its  character  by  becoming  the 
privilege  of  heroes.  The  Bible  avoids  even  unfounded 
stories.  It  is  taken  up  with  tangible  things,  with  discoveries 
which  are  still  known;  it  relates  their  origin  and  progress, 
and  leaves  them  in  a  hazy  light,  which  has  no  outward  sem- 
blance of  actual  history.  If  the  personality  of  Lamech  seems 
to  stand  out  against  this  background  it  is  only  in  an  elegy. 
Could  the  author  have  told  us  more  clearly  that  there  exists 
no  history  of  these  periods  ? 

''I  find  a  similar  regard  for  reality,  in  so  far  as  it  can  be 
reached  and  set  forth,  in  the  story  of  the  Deluge  and  the 
Tower  of  Babel. 

"There  is  a  modem  school,  represented  by  Canon  Cheyne, 
which  considers  the  Deluge  mythical —  mythical,  that  is,  in 
that  it  is  the  translation  of  an  astronomical  phenomenon  into 
history.  But  the  great  majority  of  anthropologists  con- 
sider that  the  Deluge,  of  which  accounts  are  everywhere 
foimd,  is  the  memory,  more  or  less  modified,  of  real  floods.* 
M.  Suess,  professor  of  geology  at  Vienna,  and  M.  Raymond 
de  Girard,  professor  of  geology  at  Freiburg,  have  even  con- 
sidered they  could  indicate  the  physical  causes  of  the  Baby- 

*  M.  Loisy  does  not  seem  to  have  definitely  made  up  his  mind  about 
these  two  systems,  nor  does  he  point  out  in  his  work  on  Babylonian 
myths  how  fundamentally  different  they  are. 


LAGRANGE  161 

Ionian  deluge  .J  Be  that  as  it  may,  the  general  character  of 
the  biblical  story  points  to  a  real  flood,  the  religious  interpre- 
tation of  which  has  far  surpassed  its  historical  importance. 
Nor  is  the  Tower  of  Babel  a  mere  product  of  the  imagina- 
tion. The  biblical  writer  had  certainly  seen  the  gigantic 
unfinished  temple  of  Borsippa,  which  Nabuchodonosor  find- 
ing in  ruins  in  consequence  of  the  bad  state  of  its  gutters, 
made  a  boast  of  achieving.  It  was  no  mere  flight  of  the 
imagination  to  look  upon  Babylon  as  a  proud  city  where  all 
languages  were  to  be  heard.  And  after  M.  Blanckenkorn's 
careful  investigation,  the  results  of  which  were  accepted  as 
satisfactory  by  M.  de  Lapparent,  we  are  entitled  to  hold  that 
the  sinking  of  the  south  part  of  the  Dead  Sea  may  have 
taken  place  at  a  time  when  there  were  men  on  the  earth, 
and  that  the  account  of  the  destruction  of  Sodom  and  Gom- 
orrah cannot  be  simply  set  aside  as  purely  mythical —  as  the 
picturesque  expression  of  the  horror  inspired  by  scenery 
unique  in  the  world  for  its  sublime  desolateness.  Undoubt- 
edly the  biblical  story  goes  far  beyond  the  mere  fact,  other- 
wise it  would  not  faithfully  express  what  it  wishes  to  ex- 
press ;  but  it  is  always  careful  to  have  as  the  background  of 
its  picture  some  striking  reality  which  fills  the  horizon, 
whether  it  be  in  the  depths  of  the  desert  or  of  the  past." 
(Methode  Historique,  VI.) 

Withal  Pere  Lagrange  believes  in  an  unrestricted  inspira- 
tion extending  even  to  the  words.  In  his  third  conference 
before  the  Catholic  Institute  of  Toulouse,  which  conferences 
were  afterward  published  under  the  name  of  **La  Methode 
Historique,"  he  speaks  of  inspiration  thus :  "We  must  have 
recourse  to  the  principles  of  faith  and  to  psychology  if  we 
would  understand  what  the  grace  of  inspiration  really  is, 
what  special  light  it  communicates  to  the  intellect,  and  how 
the  will  is  moved.  From  the  Church's  definitions  we  may 
conclude  that  God's  help  is  antecedent  and  not  consequent, 
that  it  is  an  impulse,  and  so  necessarily  a  light  bestowed  upon 
him,  for  man  is  no  mere  machine,  and  his  will  does  not  de- 
termine anything  without  a  corresponding  light  in  the  in- 
tellect.    Now  since  this  help  is  antecedent  to  the  whole 

t  Cf.  M,  de  Girard's  article  in  the  Revue  Thomiste. 
(11)  H.S. 


162  LAGRANGE 

Operation,  it  must  extend  to  the  whole  work,  and  conse- 
quently even  to  the  very  words ;  but  since  the  sacred  writer 
used  his  ordinary  faculties,  it  impressed  nothing  ready- 
made  upon  the  mind — not  even  the  thoughts.  On  this 
particular  point  I  have  nothing  new  to  say,  and  nothing 
clearer  to  propound. 

*'So  far  reason  has  been  working  within  its  proper  limits ; 
it  is  but  fitting,  however,  that  it  should  show  more  reserve 
in  dealing  with  the  divine  historical  fact.  Our  guiding  prin- 
ciple in  this  matter  must  be  clear  to  all.  It  is  no  business  of 
ours  to  decide  what  God  must  have  done,  or  what  it  was 
fitting  that  He  should  have  done ;  all  we  have  to  do  is  humbly 
to  note  whatever  forms  part  of  His  work.  Such  questions 
are  not  to  be  solved  by  each  man  according  to  his  taste ;  we 
must  be  content  to  be  guided  by  facts. 

'The  demands  of  reason  are  to  be  taken  into  account  as 
long  as  the  question  merely  concerns  what  God  may  or  may 
not  inspire,  and  to  whom  it  is  fitting  that  He  should  betake 
Himself  to  do  so.  We  may  never  affirm  that  God  could 
teach  error — that  would  be  blasphemous — but  we  ought  to 
be  very  careful  about  confidently  concluding  that  a  thing  is 
fitting  or  unfitting.  Let  casuists,  by  all  means,  use  probable 
reasons,  in  obscure  cases,  but,  as  straightforward  critics,  we 
will  confine  our  attention  to  facts.  What  we  want  more 
especially  is  that  vigorous  care  in  reasoning  characteristic  of 
true  theologians:  the  opinion  of  such  men  is  far  less  to  be 
feared  than  the  routine  of  those  who  make  theology  a  mere 
matter  of  professional  knowledge,  who  are  unable  to  bring 
the  light  of  reason  to  bear  upon  what  they  dislike,  except 
through  prejudices  begotten  of  the  necessarily  narrow  out- 
look they  allow  themselves. 

'*If  a  French  priest  were  to  celebrate  Holy  Mass  with 
covered  head,  he  would  be  guilty  of  an  act  of  grave  irrever- 
ence, which  could  only  be  paralleled  by  celebrating  in  China 
with  head  uncovered.  We  have  not  the  same  ideas  as  had 
the  ancients  concerning  history,  morality,  literary  property, 
use  of  pseudonyms,  borrowing — in  more  or  less  disguised 
form — from  other  books,  the  revision  and  re-editing  of  works. 
Your  respect  for  inspired  authors  may  make  you  wonder 


LAGRANGE  163 

whether  you  are  to  attribute  to  them  what  to  you  seems  im- 
proper. Do  you  not  see  that  you  are  condemning  the  ac- 
tions of  the  missionary  in  China? 

**But  we  must  subject  the  historical  idea  of  inspiration  to 
a  more  searching  analysis,  and  as  we  have  dealt  with  the 
person  inspired,  let  us  now  turn  to  the  aim  of  inspiration.  If 
we  only  knew  the  exact  relation  in  which  inspiration  stood 
to  divine  teaching  a  great  result  would  be  achieved.  No  one 
hesitates  to  say  that  inspiration  goes  far  beyond  the  limits  of 
religious  teaching,  since  it  extends  to  everything,  even  to  the 
words  themselves,  while  religious  teaching  is  not  everywhere 
found.  It  would  be  a  mistaken  application  of  St.  Augustine's 
principle  that  God  does  not  teach  in  the  Bible  what  is  not  of 
use  for  salvation,  to  suppose  that  God  ceases  to  inspire  when 
not  actually  teaching  a  religious  truth. 

"The  consequence  would  be  that  all  that  is  non -religious 
in  the  Bible  would  not  be  inspired.  Now  it  is  difficult  to  see, 
for  instance,  where  lies  the  religious  teaching  of  the  Book  of 
Ruth.  In  controversy  with  protestants  it  has  often  been 
maintained  that  all  dogma  is  not  contained  in  Scripture,  for 
the  simple  reason  that  the  sacred  writers  had  no  intention  of 
always  teaching  it ;  they  wrote  as  particular  circumstances 
demanded,  sometimes  to  teach,  but  also  to  encourage,  con- 
sole, or  recommend,  as  in  the  letter  to  Philemon ;  and  we  may 
add  that  throughout  the  whole  Psalter,  rich  as  it  is  in  the 
loftiest  religious  truths,  it  is  never  the  Psalmist's  direct  object 
to  inculcate  religious  truths,  since  he  addresses  himself  to 
God,  whom  he  has  no  intention  of  instructing  when  he  con- 
fesses his  iniquities  and  asks  for  assistance  from  Him.  Still 
less  does  the  Psalmist  teach  God  historical  or  natural  truths. 
So  that  one  may  quite  fairly  ask  whether  the  aim  of  inspira- 
tion really  is  instruction.  That  it  is  not  its  direct  aim  seems 
clearly  to  follow  from  the  distinction  between  revelation  and 
inspiration.  The  Bible  contains  God's  teaching :  the  religious 
truths  He  taught  were  communicated  by  revelation,  and  it 
is  not  essential  that  revelation  should  coincide  in  point  of 
time  with  inspiration.  On  the  other  hand,  if,  in  that  teach- 
ing, we  take  the  facts  not  directly  bearing  upon  our  salvation, 
we  may  say  that  generally  speaking,  in    their  natural  and 


164  LAGRANGE 

historical  aspect,  there  was  no  absolute  need  of  God's  teach- 
ing them,  since  man's  memory  would  have  sufficed  to  retain 
them. 

''Inspiration  leads  to  writing ;  and  the  aim  of  writing  is  to 
fix  and  record  previously-acquired  knowledge,  so  that  the 
grace  of  inspiration  has  as  its  primary  object  not  to  teach, 
but  to  preserve  the  memory  of  revealed  truths,  and  of  the 
historical  facts  which  enable  the  order  and  sequence  of  reve- 
lation to  be  understood,  and  that,  although  the  aim  of  the 
sacred  writer  himself  be  to  teach :  the  notion  of  inspiration 
is  wider  in  range. 

"It  follows  from  this  first  point,  that  the  doctrine  con- 
tained in  an  inspired  book  is  not  necessarily  perfect  in  its 
literal  and  historical  meaning.  God,  in  wishing  to  preserve 
the  memory  of  facts  of  importance  in  the  history  of  man's 
salvation — occasionally  merely  of  secondary  importance, 
as  in  the  case  of  the  Book  of  Ruth — determined,  perhaps,  to 
preserve  the  memory  of  the  imperfect  ideas  men  had  of  the 
Godhead  at  a  given  stage  of  revelation.  You  remember  we 
admitted  the  idea  of  essential  progress  in  the  Old  Testament. 
He  does  not  teach  those  imperfect  ideas  to  us  in  the  form  in 
which  they  are  expressed,  nor  does  He  desire  that  we  should 
confine  ourselves  to  them.  Were  we  to  do  so,  we  should  be 
making  a  mistake,  for  through  His  Son  we  have  a  higher 
knowledge  of  His  infinite  perfection ;  it  was  His  wish  that  we 
should  have  knowledge  of  those  ideas,  the  better  to  appreciate 
the  need  in  which  we  stand  of  His  light  and  grace.  And  so  it 
is  quite  possible  that  we  may  find  in  the  Bible  inferior  senti- 
ments expressed,  not  only  by  the  impious,  but  even  by  such 
as  lived  in  the  hope  of  a  clearer  light ;  thus  the  tone  of  the 
Books  of  Proverbs  and  Ecclesiasticus  is  no  doubt  practical 
enough,  yet  often  wanting  in  moral  elevation,  and  lacking 
that  exquisite  delicacy  which  constitutes  the  glory  of  Chris- 
tian virtue.  The  meaning  has  to  be  spiritualized  in  order  to 
raise  it  to  the  Christian  standard,  and  through  its  spiritual 
meaning  the  Holy  Scriptures  regain  in  our  eyes  their  full 
value.  And  hence  the  Church,  full  of  reverence  as  she  is  for 
the  Word  of  God,  obliges  no  one  to  read  it,  and  all  instinct- 


LAGRANGE  165 

ively  feel  that  they  derive  more  profit  for  their  souls  from 
one  chapter  of  the  Imitation  than  from  the  whole  Book  of 
Leviticus. 

"  If  we  consider  the  Spirit  of  God  which  inspired  it,  the 
Bible  is  the  noblest  of  books ;  but  its  aim  and  object  is  not  so 
lofty.  God  inspired  the  preservation  of  this  teaching,  but 
it  is  far  inferior  to  the  teaching  we  find  throughout  the 
Church.  They  are  egena  elementa,  the  words  spoken  to  them 
of  old :  for  us  our  Lord  reserved  more  saving  words.  The 
facts  speak  for  themselves. 

"  Yet  we  must  not  go  too  far.  Let  us  remember  what  we 
said  before — reason  itself,  as  well  as  faith,  will  bar  the  way 
when  it  needs  must  be  barred.  It  is  impossible  that  God 
should  teach  error.  It  is  therefore  impossible,  not  that  the 
Bible,  recording  the  words  of  all  kinds  of  men,  should  con- 
tain no  error,  but  that  an  intelligent  study  of  the  Bible 
should  lead  us  to  conclude  that  God  taught  error. 

*'  But  what  do  the  sacred  writers  teach  ?  They  teach,  we 
are  told,  what  they  categorically  affimi.  Now  it  has  long 
since  been  pointed  out  that  the  Bible  is  not  a  mere  collection 
of  theses  or  categorical  affirmations.  There  are  certain 
forms  of  literary  composition  in  which  no  absolute  state- 
ment is  made  as  to  the  reality  of  the  facts  related :  they  are 
used  merely  as  the  groundwork  of  a  moral  lesson — of  this 
the  parable  is  an  example.  Now  inspiration  does  not  change 
the  forms  of  composition :  each  must  be  interpreted  according 
to  its  own  particular  rules.  It  is  not  necessary  that  I  should 
insist  on  this  point ;  it  has  been  fully  accepted  in  the  Etudes 
by  Pere  Prat,  and  to  m.e  it  seems  the  very  best  means  of 
meeting  current  objections  to  the  truthfulness  of  the  Bible. 
To-day,  however,  I  wish  to  look  at  the  question  from 
another  standpoint,  and  consider  the  method  of  divine 
teaching  as  shown  by  the  Bible  itself. 

"As  our  starting-point  we  shall  take  the  facts  we  have 
just  noted. 

"  We  all  agree  that  everything  God  teaches  must  be  re- 
ceived with  reverence,  but  it  is  quite  clear  that  in  the  Bible 
this  teaching  is  not  to  be  found  in  ready-made  statements 
standing  in  a  state  of  splendid  isolation.   It  is  mingled  with 


166  LAGRANGE 

numberless  stories,  discussions,  poetical  effusions,  anecdotes, 
prayers,  and  metaphors.  We  all  willingly  admit  that  the 
inspired  writer  has  not  always  the  intention  of  giving  instruc- 
tion in  the  name  of  God,  as  is  quite  clear,  for  instance,  when 
he  prays  to  God  for  pardon  of  his  sins ;  though  it  is  none  the 
less  true  that  few  prayers  of  the  Bible  contain  such  valuable 
teaching  as  does  the  Miserere.  And  so  it  is  possible  that 
there  may  be  divine  teaching,  even  when  the  sacred  writer 
seems  to  make  no  mention  of  it.  On  the  other  hand,  we 
must  not  be  in  too  great  a  hurry  to  receive  as  a  statement 
made  by  God  what  the  writer  is  merely  relating,  without 
taking  the  trouble  to  indicate  it  as  his  own.  If  religious 
teaching  itself  is  frequently  a  resultant  whose  formula  the 
Church  alone  is  competent  to  state,  with  still  greater  force 
does  this  apply  to  those  secondary  elements  which  only 
figure  in  Scripture  to  clothe  the  truth,  or,  if  you  prefer  St. 
Augustine's  figure,  to  serve  as  the  sounding-board  of  the 
lyre.  All  this  goes  to  prove  that  God's  teaching  is  infinitely 
beyond  our  own,  even  in  the  method  of  which  He  makes  use, 
and  that,  consequently  it  is  not  to  be  judged  by  our 
standards. 

**  Some  few  years  ago  one  of  my  brethren  Pere  Lacome,  in 
a  little  book,  entitled  Quelqiies  considerations  exegetiques  sur 
le  premier  chapitre  de  la  Genese,  which  was  published  with  the 
fullest  approval  of  Pere  Monsabre,  drew  the  exact  distinction 
that  is  here  needed.  His  theory  had  not  the  success  it 
would  have  to-day,  because  less  attention  was  then  paid  to 
such  problems.  I  shall  take  the  liberty  of  quoting  a  few  ex- 
tracts :  This  small  nation  (Israel)  owed  to  its  Prophets,  and 
to  them  alone,  its  rise  above  all  others.  Thanks  to  them, 
their  ideas  were  purified  from  errors  concerning  the  Godhead. 
But  apart  from  and  outside  this  one  point,  the 
Prophet  had  no  call  to  rectify  the  ideas  of  his  people,  and  he 
left  them  as  they  were :  he  took  them  as  he  found  them,  as 
inconsistent  as  are  the  ideas  of  a  child,  false  figures  of  the 
true,  radically  incomplete  ideas,  as  the  ideas  of  men  will  ever 
be.  Yet  the  Spirit  of  God  gave  himself  full  play  in  the 
maze  of  our  illusions,  without  ever  adopting,  to  the  extent 
of  identifying  Himself  therewith,  an  erroneous  opinion;  He 


LAGRANGE  167 

may  be  said  to  have  leaned  upon  it,  or  better,  to  have  glided 
over  it,  even  as  do  the  rays  of  sunshine  over  a  faulty  mirror, 
or  a  pool  of  muddy  water,  without  thereby  contracting  any 
stain.' 

**How  are  such  faulty  statements  to  be  reconciled  with 
the  dignity  of  the  Holy  Ghost  ?  After  all,  we  are  concerned 
with  a  book  whose  author  is  God,  who  can  neither  deceive 
nor  be  deceived.  It  is  the  standing  difficulty.  'Even  grant- 
ing,' P.  Lacome  proceeds,  'that  the  sky  spoken  of  in  Genesis 
is  a  solid  vault,  which  in  reality  it  is  not :  can  the  Holy  Spirit 
be  said  to  have  fallen  into  error?  Our  own  common-sense 
can  give  the  answer.  When  a  teacher  wishes  to  teach  a 
child  science — astronomy,  for  example — he  proceeds  step  by 
step,  not  being  able  to  convey  at  once  the  whole  of  his  knowl- 
edge to  the  mind  of  his  pupil.  Before  he  can  go  forward  he 
must  have  a  starting-point,  and  so  the  ideas  already  in  the 
mind  of  the  child  will  have  to  serve  as  the  foundation  of  all 
his  teaching.  Those  ideas  are  the  only  material  to  hand, 
the  only  forces  wherewith  to  work  to  set  the  mind  in  motion 
and  cause  it  to  go  forward. 

"When  a  master  has  to  enter  into  the  mind  of  his  pupil, 
he  endeavors  to  discover  the  weird  and  foolish  ideas  it  has ; 
and  when  he  has  found  them,  he  makes  use  of  them  to  insinu- 
ate some  particles  of  truth ;  and  then  to  help  him  to  digest  the 
first  lessons  of  astronomy,  he  goes  back  to  the  myths  and 
gropings  of  old,  he  personifies  the  sun,  speaks  of  its  going 
forth  on  its  daily  course  from  its  rise  to  its  setting ;  but  can 
it  be  fairly  said  that  in  so  doing  the  master  approved  of  all 
the  illusions  that  fill  that  youthful  mind?  Now  in  the 
Bible  the  Holy  Spirit  is  such  a  master,  such  a  preacher. 

*'He  is  a  teacher  in  the  midst  of  the  other  teachers  of 
this  world ;  He  teaches  as  they  do,  and  in  their  own  way ;  He 
has  a  teaching  of  His  own  knowledge,  of  His  own  super- 
natural knowledge,  and  He  wishes  to  impart  it  to  man.  .  .  .' 
Speaking  of  the  Wisdom  of  God  rejecting  the  knowledge  of 
man,  he  says:  'With  the  sole  qualification  of  Teacher  of 
Divine  Science  she  came,  and  established  her  chair  by  the 
side  of  other  chairs,  in  the  public  places  and  cross-roads  she 
gathered  together  all  the  passers-by  without  any  distinction, 


168  LAGRANGE 

and  to  them  set  forth  her  teaching ;  she  marked  out  her  own 
definite  position,  and  outside  that  position  she  spoke  the 
language  of  the  people,  as  all  great  teachers  of  the  himian 
race  have  done.  And  if  to  man,  who  is  all  his  life  but  a 
little  child,  she  spoke  in  childish  terms,  and  spelled  out  to 
him  the  mysteries  of  Heaven,  we  really  cannot  blame  her  for 
our  own  stammering  and  inconsequence,  she  whose  teaching 
is  so  justly  pure  and  lofty.  Our  own  ignorance  alone  should 
be  blamed.' 

'This  theory,  I  said,  created  no  sensation.  Yet  there 
was  a  watchman  on  the  alert.  Pere  Brucker,  in  the  Etudes, 
denounced  the  views  as  dangerous,  and  concluded  that, 
'Pleasing  as  Pere  Lacome's  hypothesis  may  at  first  sight 
appear,  it  seems  to  me  fraught  with  ruinous  consequences. 
.  .  .  No  wise  and  conscientious  human  teacher  would 
act  in  such  a  way;  nor  would  he  bolster  himself  up  on  the 
wrong  ideas  of  his  pupil  even  to  begin  his  work,  and  run  the 
risk  of  their  being  mistaken  for  truth,  or  of  discrediting  his 
own  lessons  in  advance.  Still  less,  therefore,  could  the  divine 
master,  Truth  itself,  make  use  of  error,  in  any  degree  what- 
ever, to  open  human  intellects  to  His  supernatural  doctrine. 
He  could  only  exploit  (if  I  may  be  allowed  the  word)  what 
is  good  and  true  in  our  ideas.'* 

'The  theory  is  perhaps  painted  in  rather  dark  colors. 
Pere  Lacome  had  said,  to  lean  upon,  or  better,  to  glide  over; 
Pere  Brucker  interprets  him  to  mean,  'to  bolster  himself 
up.' 

"P^re  Lacome  was  particularly  careful  to  draw  a  dis- 
tinction between  two  essentially  different  forms  of  teaching, 
where  his  critic  would  appear  to  see  only  one  form.  It 
would  be  foolish  for  a  teacher  of  geometry  to  tolerate  in  his 
pupils  wrong  ideas  about  a  straight  line:  how  could  he 
'bolster  himself  up'  with  that?  But  need  the  teacher  of 
grammar  trouble  himself  about  the  truth  of  the  examples 
cited  to  prove  the  rule,  and  when  he  is  teaching  them  how 
to  spell  the  name  of  King  Pharamond,  may  he  not  pass 
lightly  over  the  obscurity  of  the  early  history  of  France? 

*  Etudes,  p.  504.  1895. 


LAGRANGE  169 

"Now  if  it  be  the  case  that  St.  Paul  and  our  divine  Saviour 
have  argued  from  Holy  Scripture  according  to  the  mental 
habits  of  the  Jews,  without  seeking  the  exact  text  and  with- 
out binding  themselves  down  to  its  precise  meaning,  and 
that  the  Apostles  set  forth  as  the  fulfilment  of  a  prophecy 
what  is  merely  an  application  based  upon  the  similarity  of 
the  incidents,  with  how  much  more  reason  may  they  not 
have  made  use  of  current  Jewish  ideas  in  matters  literary 
and  scientific  without  seeking  to  rectify  them?  And  if  this 
course  of  action  is  not  unworthy  of  the  Author  of  our  faith, 
why  may  we  not  presume  that  a  similar  course  may  have 
been  adopted  by  other  sacred  writers  in  their  exposition  of 
divine  teaching  ?  The  theological  statement  of  the  fact  is  not 
of  recent  origin:  as  is  so  frequently  the  case,  the  idea  was 
stated  by  St.  Augustine,  St.  Thomas  moulded  it,  and,  in  his 
Encyclical,  Providentissimus  Deus,  Leo  XIII.  has  con- 
secrated it  anew.  The  rule  is  so  excellent  as  to  need  no 
apology  for  its  repetition. 

"  'We  have  first  to  consider,'  says  Leo  XIII.,  'that  the 
sacred  writers,  or,  to  speak  more  accurately,  the  Holy  Ghost 
who  spoke  by  them,  did  not  intend  to  teach  men  these  things 
(that  is  to  say,  the  essential  nature  of  the  things  of  the 
visible  universe),  things  in  no  way  profitable  to  salvation.'* 
Hence  they  do  not  seek  to  penetrate  the  secrets  of  nature,  but 
rather  described  and  dealt  with  things  in  more  or  less  figur- 
ative language,  or  in  terms  which  were  commonly  used  at 
the  time,  and  which  in  many  instances  are  in  daily  use  at 
this  day,  even  by  the  most  eminent  men  of  science.  Ordi- 
nary speech  primarily  and  properly  describes  what  comes 
under  the  senses ;  and  somewhat  in  the  same  way  the  sacred 
writers — as  the  Angelic  Doctor  also  reminds  us — 'went  by 
what  sensibly  appeared,'!  or  put  down  what  God,  speaking 
to  men,  signified,  in  the  way  men  could  understand  and 
were  accustomed  to'  (Providentissimus  Deus,  §  28). 

"Then  after  a  section  working  out  the  same  idea,  the 
Pope  concludes  that,  'The  principles  here  laid  down  will 
apply  to  cognate  sciences,  and  especially  to  history'  (§  30). 

*  Etudes,  p.  502.  1895.       fST  Augustine,  De  Genesi  ad  litt.,  9,  20. 


170  LAGRANGE 

"F.  Brucker  accepts  St.  Thomas'  formula,  but  takes  it  to 
mean  that  the  Bible,  'in  relating,  for  instance,  the  formation 
of  the  firmament,  the  standing  still  of  the  sun,  etc.,  speaks 
according  to  outward  appearances,  and  consequently  speaks 
truly,  though  its  language  is  not  properly  scientific.'^ 

**It  would  be  more  correct  to  say  that  in  such  cases  the 
Bible  is  neither  right  nor  wrong.  It  is  quite  clear  that  the 
ancient  writers  knew  no  more  than  they  appear  to  know. 
When  I  use  similar  statements,  I  know,  like  everyone  else, 
that  it  is  wrong,  so  much  so  that  the  error  has  become  a  mere 
figure  of  speech.  Now,  can  an  author  who  looks  upon  the 
sky  as  a  solid  vault,  and  who  definitely  states  his  opinion  in 
that  sense  (for  otherwise  we  should  never  have  guessed  it), 
be  really  said  to  express  himself  in  a  manner  at  once  exact 
and  true,  though  not  strictly  scientific?  Is  it  possible  in 
such  a  case  to  make  a  distinction  between  science  and  truth  ? 

*'It  may  be  objected  that  if  the  statement  is  not  true  it 
must  be  false,  and  then  what  becomes  of  the  truthfulness  of 
the  Bible?  The  objection  admits  of  a  simple  answer.  A 
statement  must  be  either  true  or  false :  but  here,  there  is  no 
question  of  a  statement.  Remember  what  St.  Thomas  says : 
the  sacred  writer  Vent  by  what  sensibly  appeared.'  If  you 
confine  yotirself  to  mere  appearances,  you  do  not  judge  the 
thing  in*  itself ;  and  where  there  is  no  such  judgment  there  is 
neither  affirmation  nor  negation.  Now  it  is  an  elementary 
logical  fact  that  truth  and  error  are  only  to  be  found  in  a 
formal  act  of  judgment. 

'The  Holy  Father  very  briefly  states  that  the  same  cri- 
terion should  be  applied  to  history." 

Lagrange  cites  the  following  passage  from  Cornely: 

"The  interpreter  ought  to  pay  great  attention  to  the 
manner  in  which  the  sacred  writers  give  their  historical 
accotints.  For,  as  St.  Jerome  points  out,  'it  is  customary  in 
Scripture  for  the  historian  to  give  the  common  opinion  as 
generally  received  in  his  own  day ;'  and  again ;  'many  things 
are  related  in  the  Scriptures  according  to  the  opinion  of  the 
day  in  which  the  facts  occurred,  and  not  according  to  what  in 

*  St.  Thomas,  Summa  TheoL,  p.  1.  q.  Ixx.,  a  i.  ad  3. 


LAGRANGE  171 

reality  took  place  {et  non  juxta  quod  ret  Veritas  continehat) .' 
This  observation  of  the  holy  doctor  is  most  important.  He 
thus  warns  us  not  to  press  the  words  of  Scripture  to  make 
them  meet  the  present  state  of  scientific  knowledge,  but  to 
explain  them  in  accordance  with  the  ideas  and  intentions  of 
the  sacred  writer.  What  a  number  of  difficulties  would 
never  have  been  raised  had  all  interpreters  always  kept  St. 
Jerome's  word  of  warning  before  them?"  Lagrange  con- 
cludes : 

"  It  means  to  say  that  historical  accounts,  and  even  those 
which  bear  the  fullest  token  of  their  historical  character, 
must  not  be  understood  in  the  light  of  the  knowledge  of  God 
who  knows  all  things,  but  in  the  light  of  man's  limited  out- 
look, and,  that  it  is  quite  conceivable  that  God  should  not 
communicate  further  information  to  the  sacred  writer,  who 
knows  no  more  than  other  men  on  a  particular  point,  even 
though,  in  consequence,  he  should  make  use  of  a  materially 
wrong  expression. 

"Use  all  the  arguments  ex  convenientia  you  like — these 
are  facts,  clear  biblical  facts,  and  easy  to  check.  From 
this  it  follows  that  the  sacred  writers  speak  according  to 
what  appears  to  them.  The  theory  is  a  traditional  one.  It 
has  merely  to  be  applied  to  particular  cases  as  the  needs  of 
criticism  call  for  it,  making  due  allowance  for  the  distinction 
between  history  and  natural  science.  And  it  is  precisely  in 
that  application  of  traditional  principles  to  the  results  of 
human  industry  that  consists  the  progress  of  theological 
science,"     (Methode  Historique,  pp.  91 — 116.) 

The  defect  in  the  system  of  Lagrange  is  its  excess :  falsis 
vera  involvit.  Though  he  disclaims  to  place  history  on  the 
same  plane  as  natural  science,  in  some  of  his  applications 
he  does  so.  Nay  more,  as  we  have  seen  in  his  own  words,  he 
makes  Leo  XIII.  in  his  encyclical  ''Providentissimus  Deus" 
sponsor  for  this  new  theory.  As  we  have  given  the  papal 
encyclical  complete  in  our  present  treatise,  we  refer  to  that  to 
show  the  falsity  of  Lagrange's  appeal.  The  Pope  gives  rules 
for  dealing  with  the  objections  drawn  from  science ;  and  then 
declares  that  men  are  to  deal  with  kindred  sciences  and  with 
history  in  the  same  manner.     That  is  by  showing  that  our 


172  LAGRANGE 

adversaries  often  demand  more  for  their  hypotheses  than 
they  are  worth ;  by  showing  that  many  things  formerly  held 
by  them  are  now  abandoned;  and  by  showing  that  what 
is  clearly  proven  does  not  conflict  with  Scripture.  These 
are  the  principles  which  the  Pope  advises  to  apply  to  history. 

Fr.  Delattre,  S.  J.,  has  shown  this  conclusively  in  his 
"Autour  de  la  Question  Biblique"  wherein  he  ably  exposes 
the  excesses  of  the  system  of  Lagrange.  It  seems  also  that 
a  recent  decision  of  the  Biblical  Commission  sanctioned  by 
the  Pope,  forbids  some  of  the  applications  of  Lagrange's 
theory. 

This  is  the  wording  of  the  question  proposed  to  the 
Commission:  "Is  it  lawful  for  the  Catholic  exegetist  to 
solve  the  difficulties  occurring  in  certain  texts  of  Sacred 
Scripture,  which  appear  to  relate  historical  facts,  by  assert- 
ing that  in  these  we  have  to  deal  with  a  tacit  or  implicit 
quotation  of  a  document  written  by  an  uninspired  author, 
and  that  the  inspired  author  did  not  at  all  intend  to  approve 
or  adopt  all  of  these  assertions,  which  cannot,  therefore,  be 
held  to  be  free  from  error?" 

The  answer  reads :  "In  the  negative,  except  in  the  case 
when,  due  regard  being  paid  to  the  sense  and  judgment  of 
the  Church,  it  is  proved  by  solid  arguments;  (i)  that  the 
sacred  writer  has  really  quoted  the  sayings  or  documents 
of  another ;  and  (2)  that  he  has  neither  approved  nor  adopted 
them,  so  that  he  may  be  properly  considered  not  to  be  speak- 
ing in  his  own  name. "  This  answer  was  submitted  to  the 
Holy  Father,  and  signed  and  sanctioned  by  His  Holiness  on 
February  13,  1905. 

In  a  private  audience  granted  me  in  June  of  1905,  the 
Holy  Father  Pius  X.  spoke  sadly  of  the  tendencies  of  some 
Catholic  scholars,  who  have  been  led  away  by  the  labored 
erudition  of  the  Rationalists ;  and  w1io  have  accepted  some 
of  the  false  principles  of  "higher  criticism." 

When  Pere  Lagrange  defends  the  theory  that  in  scientific 
facts  the  inspired  writers  spoke  according  to  appearances, 
he  says  nothing  new ;  the  principle  has  been  handed  down 
from  the  Fathers.  When  he  admits  the  presence  of  allegory, 
parable,    and    metaphor    in    the    Holy    Books,    especially 


LAGRANGE  173 

in  the  early  chapters  of  Genesis,  we  agree  fully  with  him. 
But  when  he  applies  his  theory  of  appearances  to  real  his- 
torical personages  there  is  an  excess.  For  instance,  when 
the  Scriptures  declare  that  Joshua  arrested  the  course  of  the 
sun  it  affirms  a  truth,  a  truth  that  could  not  have  been 
better  enunciated  by  the  most  accomplished  astronomer  of 
our  day.  It  affirms  that  a  day  was  miraculously  lengthened. 
The  same  is  true  when  it  is  asserted  that  God  created  a 
firmament.  It  assigns  to  God  the  creation  of  the  universe 
which  is  spoken  of  as  the  ancients  saw  it.  But  when  the 
Scriptures  assert  that  Sarah  went  down  into  Egypt,  and  was 
taken  into  Pharaoh's  house,  if  the  account  be  not  true  as 
history,  nothing  is  true.  Every  circumstance  proclaims 
that  the  writer  wished  to  be  understood  as  writing  genuine 
history.  And  yet,  Lagrange  disposes  of  the  event  as  fol- 
lows: 

"Can  that  whole  story  which  God  willed  to  be  preserved 
be  said  to  be  above  the  imperfections  of  the  religious  truth 
of  those  days  ?  Did  it  come  more  directly  from  God  to  our 
souls  than  does  the  religious  truth  on  which  we  look  to  the 
Church  for  a  final  decision?" 

Lagrange  asserts  that  he  preserves  the  groimdwork  of 
the  history,  and  applies  the  theory  of  folk-lore  only  to  the 
details ;  but  one  may  see  by  his  own  application  of  his  system 
that  he  treats  as  details  substantial  records  of  events  such 
as  the  incest  of  Lot,  the  destruction  of  Sodom,  the  rape  of 
Sarah,  etc.  Now  these  events  are  recorded  as  history;  they 
have  no  purpose  if  they  be  legendary ;  and  it  seems  incom- 
patible with  the  Church's  definitions  to  declare  such  narra- 
tives to  be  merely  folk-lore. 

The  phrase  folk-lore  is  a  favorite  expression  of  Lagrange. 
In  his  theory,  primitive  history  ceases  to  be  history.  It  is 
simply  a  collection  of  folk-lore ;  and  its  relation  to  religion 
lies  only  in  this,  that  no  false  ideas  of  faith  or  morals  are 
found  therein.  Thus  monotheism  purifies  primitive  history 
from  the  errors  of  the  folk-lore  of  the  idolatrous  nations. 
We  believe  that  this  theory  is  false  for  the  reason  that  it  does 
not  leave  to  the  Bible  the  character  attributed  to  it  by  the 
Church.      The   error  is  in  an  excessive   application  of  a 


174  LIBERAL   THEORIES 

principle  which  has  a  substratum  of  truth.  It  may  well  be 
admitted  that  in  the  mere  details  of  facts  of  history  abso- 
lute precision  is  not  demanded  in  order  that  it  be  true  his- 
tory ;  but  no  theory  may  lawfully  be  applied  to  the  history 
of  the  Bible  which  makes  any  part  of  it  anything  but  true 
history.  It  must  be  true  history ;  and  its  facts  must  be  true, 
even  though  they  have  no  immediate  relation  to  doctrine  or 
morals.  We  can  not  reason  here  a  priori;  it  is  not  for  us  to 
determine  how  God  should  have  delivered  his  message: 
the  definition  of  the  Church,  though  it  leaves  a  free  ground 
fot  discussion,  allows  no  man  a  theory  which  makes  any 
part  of  the  Bible  other  than  true  history.  Allegories,  par- 
ables and  metaphors  presented  in  their  proper  setting  are 
not  inconsistent  with  the  truthful  character  of  a  book;  but 
the  myths,  fables,  and  legends  of  folk-lore  presented  as 
history  are  formally  false,  and  can  not  be  a  part  of  a  book 
of  which  God  is  the  Author. 

In  1904,  the  Rev.  Ferd.  Prat,  S.  J.,  published  a  small 
brochure  entitled  La  Bible  et  I'Histoire.  The  work  is  a 
synthesis  of  the  opinions  of  Lagrange,  and  adds  little  that  is 
new.  He  also  invokes  the  Encyclical  Providentissimus 
Deus  in  support  of  the  historical  method.  Others  who  have 
in  a  more  or  less  degree  favored  the  new  exegesis  are  Alfred 
Durand  (Revue  du  Clerg^  frangais),  F.  Girerd  (Annales  de 
philosophic  chr^tienne),  P.  Batiffol  .(Bulletin  de  litterature 
ecclesiastique) ,  G.  Bonaccorsi  (Studi  religiosi),  Vincent 
Zapletal,  and  Vincent  Rose. 

As  before  stated,  we  believe  the  evil  of  the  new  theory  to 
lie  in  its  excess,  and  hence  care  must  be  taken  to  distinguish 
what  sound  dogma  may  admit  in  the  new  exegesis.  This  is 
an  exegetical  question  and  can  not  be  treated  here. 

It  is  however  not  in  accordance  with  truth  to  invoke  the 
encyclical  of  Leo  XIII.  in  support  of  these  theories.  The 
words  of  the  encyclical  itself  and  many  other  utterances  of 
the  pontiff  manifest  that  he  condemned  the  ultra  views  of 
the  very  men  who  cite  the  "Providentissimus  Deus"  in 
support  of  their  theories.  It  is  also  ridiculous  to  allege 
St.  Jerome  as  authority  for  the  historical  method.  The  be- 
fore mentioned  work  of  Fr.  Delattre  has  clearly  demon- 
strated the  falsity  of  this  claim. 


LOISY  175 

The  able  presentation  of  the  new  theories  has  proven 
the  truth  of  the  Latin  proverb :  '  'Nihil  est  tarn  improbable 
quod  probando  not  fiat  probabile." 

The  Belgian  Benedictin  Dom.  Sanders  published  in  1903, 
a  treatise  under  the  title  ''Etudes  sur  St.  Jerome"  in  which 
he  attempted  to  base  the  liberal  exegesis  on  the  authority  of 
St.  Jerome.  The  Literar.  Rundschau,  XXXI. ,  1905,  has 
ably  shown  the  defective  critique  of  Dom.  Sanders'  work. 
It  is  a  mangling  of  history  to  compel  it  to  support  a  theory 
already  determined. 

Alfred  Loisy  has  drifted  so  far  from  orthodoxy  that  it  is 
scarcely  worth  our  while  to  examine  his  views  on  inspira- 
tion. In  his  Etudes  Bibliques  (Paris,  1901)  he  discusses  the 
new  science  of  criticism  as  applied  to  the  Bible.  He  de- 
clares that  "Scripture  contains  a  divine  and  a  human  ele- 
ment; but  these  two  elements  so  compenetrate  each  other 
that  they  form  a  divine -human  work  in  which  the  divine 
action  and  the  human  action  cannot  be  separated.  These 
two  operations  act  per  modum  unius,  as  the  Scholastics  say. 
An  inspired  book  is  wholly  the  work  of  God,  and  wholly  the 
work  of  man.  To  distinguish  the  inspiration  of  the  matter 
from  the  non -inspired  words ;  or  to  assign  the  dogmatic  and 
moral  texts  to  God,  and  assign  other  things  to  the  human 
author  is  to  operate  the  vivisection  of  the  books." 

M.  Loisy  next  proceeds  to  admit  a  ''relative  element  in 
the  scriptures.  This  relative  element  comes  from  the  fact 
that  the  books  express  the  beliefs  of  the  times  in  science 
and  in  certain  parts  of  history.  The  Scriptures  were  adapted 
to  the  conditions  of  the  times,  and  hence  with  the  progress 
of  science  an  imperfection  is  revealed,  and  this  must  always 
be  verified  in  human  progress.  That  which  men  call  errors 
in  the  Scripture  is  nothing  more  than  its  relative  part,  which 
marks  the  stage  of  human  progress  at  the  date  of  the  origin 
of  the  book.  There  will  thus  be  an  ever  changing  element  in 
exegesis  as  human  progress  goes  on;  and  there  will  be  a 
fixed  element,  for  the  church  safeguards  the  truths  which 
never  change.  In  a  word  the  inspired  book  is  a  product  of 
the  times,  and  reflects  the  state  of  learning,  of  customs,  and 
in  a  way,  of  the  moral  code  of  the  times.     Hence  the  first 


176  ZANECCHIA 

eleven  chapters  of  Genesis  are  not  historical ;  but  a  presenta- 
tion of  the  philosophy  of  creation  in  the  form  of  the  Chaldean 
traditions. 

In  consequence  of  these  views  M.  Loisy  was  compelled 
to  leave  the  Catholic  Institute  of  Paris,  where  he  had  taught 
for  twelve  years.  Five  of  his  works  are  on  the  Index  of 
prohibited  books.  It  seems  quite  evident  that  Pius  X.  had 
the  opinions  of  M.  Loisy  in  mind  when  in  his  allocution  to 
the  newly  created  cardinals  on  April  i8,  1907,  he  declared: 
**As  for  tradition,  everything  is  relative  and  subject  to 
mutations;  consequently  the  authority  of  the  holy  Fathers 
is  reduced  to  a  nullity." 

Zanecchia  is  a  pronounced  advocate  of  the  new  exegesis. 
He  follows  closely  the  teaching  of  Lagrange,  but  is  bolder 
in  applying  them.  We  reproduce  here  a  few  passages  in 
the  original  Latin  from  his  most  recent  work,  ''Scriptor 
sacer  sub  div.  Insp.  juxta  sent.  Card.  Franzelin,  Romae 
1903:"  "In  sacris  ergo  libris  qui  historici  appellantur, 
sub  forma  historica  qua  conscripti  fuerunt,  non  semper  vera 
historia  factonmi  eorumque  chronologicus  ordo  reperitur, 
quia  Scopus  hagiographorum  non  erat  ubique  veram  his- 
toriamhumanarum  rerum  tradere,  sed  commimiter  utebantur 
historicis  notionibus,  et  prout  in  vulgo  erant,  ad  religiosas 
vel  morales  veritates  docendas.  Qui  proinde  in  ea  quae 
sacra  historia  vocatur  accuratam  veramque  historiam  ubique 
reperire  praesumit,  se  exponit  certo  periculo  inveniendi 
non  historicam  veritatem  sed  historicos  errores,  qui  tamen 
neque  Deo  inspiranti  neque  hagiographo  scribenti  imputari 
possunt,  sed  unice  inquirenti  historicam  veritatem  ubi  nee 
Deus  nee  hagiographus  eam  docuerunt  [docuit]." 

*'Demum  nihil  prohibet  scriptorem  sacrum  ad  ostenden- 
dam  processionem  omnium  creaturarum  a  Deo,  uti  docu- 
mentis  ac  traditionibus  in  quibus  rerum  eventus  plus  vel 
minus  poetica  descriptione  narrantur.  Sic  in  primis  Genesis 
capitibus  introductio  dierum  in  instantanea  creatione,  ordo 
quo  res  a  Deo  processerunt,  descriptio  format ionis  proto- 
parentum,  eorum  felicitas  ante  lapsum,  descriptio  paradisi 
voluptatis,  arboris  vitae  et  arboris  scientiae  boni  ac  mali  in 
medio  paradisi,  fiuvii  qui  inde  egrediens  in  quattuor  partes 


HOLZHEY  177 

dividebatur,  relatio  colloquii  Dei  cum  lapsis  protoparentibus, 
ttinicarum  pelliceartim  quibus  Deus  eos  vestivit  etc.,  sunt 
narrationes  veridicae  quantum  ad  radicem  eventuum,  sedin 
earum  forma  descriptiva  orientalis  poetica  extranea  non 
fuit.  Hagiographus  autem  narrationes  illas  accepit  prout 
in  usu  erant  apud  populos,  et  in  sacro  Libro  retulit,  non 
quidem  ut  auctoritate  propria  illas  approbaret,  praesertim 
in  earum  forma,  sed  quatenus  lumine  inspirativo  iudicavit 
conscribendas  esse,  ut  populi  cognoscerent  cuncta  mundi 
bona  non  alium  praeter  Deum  auctorem  habuisse,  qui 
specialem  providentiam  erga  hominem  manifestavit,  singu- 
laremque  misericordiam  una  cum  iustitia  in  eimi 
ostendit."     .     .     . 

"Ut  igitur  concludamus,  narrationes  biblicae  neque 
omnes  historicam  veritatem  habent,  neque  omnes  historica 
veritate  destitutae  sunt,  et  quamplures  ex  eis  inveniuntur 
in  quibus  fundamentum  designat  veridicum  atque  histori- 
cum  factimi,  forma  vero  et  circumstantiae  quibus  traditur 
ex  poetica  arte  proveniunt.  Similiter  omnes  biblicae  asser- 
tiones  veritatem  continent,  haec  tamen  neque  semper  abso- 
luta  est,  neque  ubique  relativa  manet,  sed  in  aliquibus 
absoluta  est  et  in  aliis  relativa.  Vera  itaque  intelligentia 
Scripturae  maximam  eruditionem  requirit,  ubi  vero  haec  non 
sufficit,  exspectandum  est  indicium  Ecclesiae,  cuius  est 
iudicare  de  vero  sensu  ac  interpretatione  Script urarum." 

For  more  than  twenty  years  the  new  exegesis  was  being 
propagated  with  great  activity  in  France,  England,  and  in 
other  lands  before  CathoHc  scholars  in  Germany  entered 
into  the  movement.  In  1903,  the  Bulletin  de  Litterature 
Ecclesiastique  reproached  the  German  theologians  (Bard- 
enhewer,  Hoberg,  etc.)  with  being  stationary,  and  with 
not  realizing  that  there  was  a  biblical  question.  In  1902, 
Prof.  Karl  Holzhey  published  his  work  ''Schoepfung,  Bibel 
imd  Inspiration,"  (Vienna  and  Stuttgart).  Though  more 
temperate  than  the  French  ''ecole  large,"  Holzhey  admits 
an  imperfect  side  of  the  Scriptures.  The  inspired  writer 
has  his  own  individuality,  and  impresses  it  on  his  work.  He 
is  also  the  child  of  his  times,  and  impresses  on  his  work  the 
beliefs  of  his  age.     Divine  inspiration  is  consistent  with 

(12)    H.S. 


178  VON  HUMMELAUER  ♦ 

these  imperfections.  The  inspired  writer  never  utters  a 
formal  lie ;  but  is  not  necessarily  ahead  of  his  age  except  in 
the  case  of  direct  revelation.  Holzhey  then  asks  the  ques- 
tion: Whether  inspiration  so  strengthens  the  writer's 
human  judgment  that  he  commits  no  substantial  error.  In 
his  answer  he  distinguishes  between  the  main  truth  which 
the  writer  wished  to  express  and  the  mode  of  expression. 
The  mode  of  expression  is  not  necessarily  determined  by 
divine  power.  Again  as  the  very  nature  of  a  human  work 
is  to  be  human  and  therefore  imperfect,  without  a  series 
of  miracles  the  work  of  the  inspired  writer  cannot  be  totally 
preserved  from  imperfections.  In  these  there  is  no  formal 
falsehood:  the  writer  has  made  use  of  his  data  honestly 
and  truthfully ;  but  yet  as  the  work  bears  the  impress  of  a 
human  author,  it  will  also  have  human  imperfections. 
Holzhey  condemns  the  theory  restricting  inspiration  to  things 
of  faith  and  morals,  and  will  not  exempt  ''obiter  dicta" 
from  inspiration.  He  extends  inspiration  to  all  the  Scrip- 
ture ;  but  the  cooperation  of  the  divine  and  himian  elements 
leaves  a  certain  human  imperfection  in  the  work,  not  of  a 
nature  to  defeat  God's  purpose. 

In  1904,  Fr.  Franz  von  Hummelauer,  S.  J.,  published  in 
the  series  of  "Biblische  Studien"  a  brochure  entitled  ''Exe- 
getisches  zur  Inspirationsfrage."  This  work  caused  much 
amazement  to  those  who  had  known  the  learned  exegete's 
work  in  the  ''Cursus  Scripturae  Sacrae."  Fr.  von  Hum- 
melauer" is  a  pronounced  advocate  of  the  new  Exegesis. 
The  ground  principle  of  his  whole  system  is  the  greater  role 
given  to  the  human  side  of  inspiration.  He  confesses  in  the 
foreword  that  he  has  made  large  study  of  French  works  on 
the  subject,  which  admission  prepares  us  to  find  in  his  work 
the  influence  of  the  ''ecole  large".  He  declares  that  the 
time  is  not  yet  come  to  formulate  definitive  theories  on  in- 
spiration; but  yet  he  puts  forth  his  hypothesis  in  a  very 
positive  manner.  Von  Hummelauer  groups  his  views  under 
three  heads:  "(i)  the  form  of  literature  in  which  the  nar- 
rative portions  of  the  Old  Testament  have  come  down  to  us ; 
(2)  the  human  side  of  Biblical  inspiration;  (3)  the  human 
authors  of  the  inspired  books." 


VON  HUMMELAUER  179 

Von  Hummelauer  acknowledges  that  he  is  more  a  col- 
lector of  what  others  have  written  than  an  original  creator 
of  his  treatise.  And  true  enough  on  the  first  page  we  find 
the  principle  of  Lagrange :  Every  word  in  the  Bible  is  true 
in  the  sense  that  God  and  the  inspired  writer  understood  it 
and  wrote  it.  The  sense  of  the  human  author  is  determined 
by  what  von  Hummelauer  calls  the  remote  context,  that 
is  the  literary  form  of  the  inspired  work. 

Father  von  Himimelauer  draws  the  attention  of  his 
readers  not  merely  to  the  historical  novel,  but  also  to  the 
fable,  the  parable,  the  epic;  again,  to  the  form  of  religious 
history,  of  antique  history,  of  national  tradition  or  folk-lore, 
of  the  Midrash,  and  of  the  prophetic  or  apocalyptic  narrative. 
The  author  believes  that  God  can  move  the  inspired  writer 
to  make  use  of  one  and  all  of  these  various  literary  forms  in 
his  naratives.  And  what  becomes  of  Biblical  inerrancy  in 
this  case?  An  inspired  parable,  or  epic,  or  historical  novel 
is  truthful  in  the  same  way  in  which  profane  works  of  the 
respective  literary  form  are  considered'truthful.  The  reader 
well  knows  that  the  religious  historian  makes  the  material 
and  the  form  of  his  narrative  subservient  to  edification ;  he 
knows  that  the  antique  historian  represents  his  facts  in  an 
artistically  free  form ;  that  in  folk-lore,  fiction  is  not  limited 
to  form,  but  extends  to  the  contents  of  the  narrative,  though 
some,  and  perhaps  a  great  many,  of  its  statements,  may  be 
historically  true;  that  the  Midrash  resembles  our  passion- 
play  in  representing  a  Biblical  narrative  in  such  a  way  as  to 
inculcate  a  religious  or  moral  lesson;  finally,  that  the  apo- 
calyptic narrative  contains  a  great  many  symbolic  repre- 
sentations. 

According  to  Fr.  von  Hummelauer,  several  of  the  Old 
Testament  narratives  actually  present  some  of  the  fore- 
going literary  forms.  Scholz  had  suggested  that  the  Book 
of  Judith  might  be  a  parable,  but  Fr.  Prat  mentions  the 
Book  in  connection  with  the  Midrash.^  The  epic  is  repre- 
sented in  the  psalms  on  creation,  e.  g.,  Ps.  135,  and  on 
Pharaoh's  death  in  the  Red  Sea.     The  historical  novel  is 


I     Etudes,  1902,  iv.,  625. 


180  VON  HUMMELAUER 

mentioned  in  connection  with  the  Books  of  Ruth,  Judith, 
Esther,  and  Tobias  by  such  writers  as  Fr.  Prat,^  Fr.  Brucker^ 
Scholz,^  Schanz,^  Vigouroux,®  E.  Cosquin,'  L.  Fonck,^  A. 
Durand,^  Lagrange,^"  and  Gayraud.^  Finally,  von  Hum- 
melauer  is  of  opinion  that  the  Book  of  Genesis  presents  the 
form  of  national  tradition  or  folk-lore,  while  the  Book  of 
Ruth  may  be  considered  as  a  form  of  family  tradition.  He 
gives  three  reasons  for  his  view  as  to  the  Book  of  Genesis : 
(i)  The  formula  'these  are  the  generations'  or  'this  is  the 
book  of  the  generation'  occurs  some  ten  times  in  Genesis, 
and  replaces  the  Hebrew  expression  'elle  toledoth;  it  appears 
to  be  agreed  that  the  rendering  is  not  exact,  but  the  Rev. 
author  belives  that  the  rendering  'this  is  the  national  tra- 
dition concerning  heaven  and  earth,'  or  'this  is  the  folk- 
lore concerning  Adam,'  would  be  correct.  The  author  of 
Genesis  claims,  therefore,  to  write  a  series  of  national  tra- 
ditions. (2)  The  primeval  records  of  all  other  nations  have 
passed  into  national  tradition  or  folk-lore ;  now,  there  is  no 
evidence  to  prove  a  special  divine  intervention  in  favor  of 
the  earliest  Hebrew  records.  (3)  The  first  eleven  chapters 
of  Genesis  present  a  remarkable  affinity  to  the  national  tra- 
ditions of  other  nations,  so  that  we  naturally  consider  them 
as  their  Hebrew  parallels. 

Fr.  Von  Hummelauer  considers  in  the  second  part  of 
his  pamphlet  the  historian  of  the  Old  Testament  rather 
than  any  other  inspired  author.  The  author  supposes  the 
wellknown  principle  that  by  merely  quoting  a  source  we 
do  not  become  responsible  for  the  objective  truthfulness  of 
the  same.     A  quotation  is  true  if  it  faithfully  reproduces 

2  Etudes,   1902,  iv.,  624  ff.  , 

3  Etudes,   1903,  i.,  231. 

4  Kommentar  iiber  d.  B.  Judith  u.iiber  Bel  u  Drache;  Leipzig,  1898- 

5  Apologie,  576,  582. 

6  Revue  Biblique,  1899,  50, 

7  Ibid.,  pp.  50  ff. 

8  Civilta  Catt.,  1903,  x.,  580. 

9  Revu£  du  Clerge  frang.,  1902,  xxxiii.,  8. 

10  La  m^thode  historique,  Paris,  1903,  83  S. ;  Revue  Biblique,  1896,  511. 

11  Revue  du  Clerge  frang.,  1903,  xxxiv.,   118. 


VON  HUMMELAUER  181 

the  original  text.  In  the  same  way,  a  history  of  Rome  ac- 
cording to  Livy,  e.  g.,  does  not  vouch  for  the  objective 
truthfulness  of  the  narrative;  such  a  history  is  true,  if  it 
faithfully  represents  the  history  of  Rome  according  to  the 
record  of  Livy.  It  cannot  be  called  in  question  that  the 
Bible  contains  quotations,  and  at  times  these  quotations 
are  said  to  be  colorless  so  that  they  cannot  be  distinguished 
from  their  context  except  by  critical  means.* 

Rev.  Fr.  von  Hummelauer  maintains  that  the  Books 
of  Samuel,  of  Kings,  and  of  Paralipomenon  are  a  history  of 
Israel  according  to  the  Annals  quoted  in  these  books  and 
corrected  according  to  the  prophetic  source  utilized  by  the 
writers;  that  II.  Mach.,  III. — XV.  professes  to  be  a  history 
according  to  the  writings  of  Jason,  that  the  Books  of 
Joshua,  Judges,  and  of  I.  Mach.  must  be  considered  historical 
in  the  same  way  in  w^hich  the  foregoing  books  are  historical ; 
that  most  of  the  Old  Testament  quotations  found  in  the 
New  Testament  are  citations  according  to  the  Septuagint 
translation;  that  several  typical  applications  of  Old  Testa- 
ment passages  on  the  part  of  New  Testament  writers  may 
have  been  made  according  to  the  current  interpretation  of 
Judaism;  that  finally  the  names  of  the  Old  Testament 
authors  are  given  by  New  Testament  writers  according 
to  the  current  Jewish  tradition.  In  none  of  these  cases, 
therefore,  can  we  hold  the  inspired  writer  responsible 
for  the  objective  truthfulness  of  his  course,  unless  he  freely 
vouches  for  the  same.  This  does  not  impair  the  historical 
character  of  the  inspired  books ;  for  they  are  as  truthful  as 
historical  docimients  usually  are.  In  fact,  they  are  more 
reliable  than  other  historical  documents,  seeing  that  gross 
errors  are  incompatible  with  the  dignity  of  an  inspired  work. 
Nor  does  this  ex'planation  conflict  with  the  Fathers,  seeing 
that  they  explained  away  their  historical  difficulties  by  hav- 
ing recourse  to  a  spiritual  meaning  of  Sacred  Scripture. 

Von  Hummelauer  cites  Pope  Leo's  encyclical  as  author- 
ity for  his  views,  and  repeats  the  formula  of  Lagrange,  that 
the  inspired  writer  is  the  child  of  his  times,  that  he  stands 

*  Cf.  Prat,  Etudes,  1901,  i,  485;  Durand,  Revue  du  Clerge  frariQ.,  1902, 
xxxiii.,  20  ff.;  Lagrange,  Revue  Biblique,  1896,  508. 


182  LIBERAL   OPINIONS 

on  the  scientific  plane  of  his  age,  and  his  knowledge  is  limited 
by  the  horizon  of  his  age.  Therefore  we  must  not  read  our 
opinions  into  the  books,  but  draw  the  author's  opinions  out 
of  them.  He  concludes  that  the  question  within  proper  lim- 
its belongs  not  to  dogma,  but  to  literary  criticism. 

Fr.  von  Hummelauer  quotes  the  following  sentence  from 
Durand  (Revue  du  Clergy  frangais  XXXIII.,  1902) :  "Men 
have  compared  the  inspired  word  of  God  with  the  Incarnate 
Word  of  God.  The  Apostle  says  that  the  Incarnate  Word 
was  made  like  to  us  in  all  save  sin :  we  may  say  that  the  in- 
spired word  becomes  a  human  utterance  in  all  save  error." 
Von  Hummelauer  evidently  accepts  this  as  a  most  apt 
simile.  He  develops  it  still  further:  ''Yes,  that  (error)  is 
the  bound  which  is  reached  butr  not  passed.  The  Son  of 
God  was  sinless,  but  he  was  tempted :  he  was  not  to  see  cor- 
ruption ;  but  he  died  and  was  buried.  Man's  word  having 
become  God's  word  is  free  of  error,  but  it  comes  to  the 
bound  of  error.  Not  to  it  is  stranger  the  argumentum  ad 
hominem  which  uses  error,  though  it  does  not  affirm  error." 

It  seems  that  this  example  is  most  unfitting  and  irrever- 
ent. It  proves  nothing  for  the  new  exegesis.  In  the  cate- 
gory of  sin  there  was  no  weakness  in  the  Son  of  God :  he  was 
not  tempted  from  within.  He  did  not  come  to  the  hound  of 
sin,  and  there  stop.  So  likewise  we  may  logically  argue 
that  in  the  category  of  error  there  is  no  weakness  in  the 
Scriptures ;  they  do  not  stop  at  the  boimdary  of  error.  They 
have  human  elements  corresponding  to  the  human  in  Christ ; 
they  are  not  always  written  in  the  finest  style ;  the  expres- 
sion may  not  always  be  the  most  apt ;  they  employ  the  scien- 
tific notions  of  their  time ;  but  their  enunciations  are  always 
true.  Though  they  treated  history  without  the  critical 
method,  they  were  upheld  by  the  power  of  God  to  write 
true  history. 

In  our  review  of  the  liberal  opinions  on  inspiration  w^e 
have  not  contemplated  to  give  all  the  authors.  We  have 
given  the  ablest  exponents,  and  we  believe  that  those  omit- 
ted add  nothing  new  to  the  principles  here  reviewed.  Fr. 
Hildebrand  Hopfl  (das  Buch  der  Bucher,  Freiburg,  1904), 
closely  follows    Zanecchia;   Engelkemper    (die    Paradieses 


ST.  JEROME  183 

fliisse,  1 901)  and  Norbert  Peters  (die  grundsatzliche  Stellung 
der  Katholischen  Kirche  zur  Bibelforschting,  Paderbom, 
1905).  add  nothing  to  the  theories  of  Holzhey  and  von 
Hummelauer. 

Before  closing  this  review  of  the  liberal  opinions  we  sub- 
mit a  brief  notice  of  the  manner  in  which  the  adherents  of 
the  New  Exegesis  present  what  they  choose  to  call  St. 
Jerome's  "law  of  history." 

In  the  XXVII.  chapter  of  Jeremiah  is  narrated  that 
Jeremiah   prophesied  the   Babylonian   captivity.     In  the 

XXVIII.  chapter,  Hananiah,  the  son  of  Azzur,  contradicts 
Jeremiah,  and  declares  that  within  two  years  the  God  of 
Israel  shall  break  the  yoke  of  the  King  of  Babylon.  The 
Lord  reveals  to  Jeremiah  that  Hananiah  had  spoken  a  lying 
prophecy.  Jeremiah  charges  the  false  prophet  with  the 
lie,  and  annoimces  to  him  that  he  should  die- that  same  year, 
which  duly  came  to  pass. 

The  Hebrew  mentions  Hananiah  as  ''Hananiah  the  son 
of  Azzur  the  prophet  who  was  of  Gabaon."  The  Septuagint 
departs  from  the  Hebrew,  and  calls  him  a  pseudo-prophet. 

"In  his  comment,  on  Jer.  XXVIII.  lo-ii,  Jerome  writes: 
'  'The  Seventy  do  not  translate  the  clause  'two  years. '  Neither 
do  they  speak  of  Ananias  as  a  prophet,  lest  they  should  seem 
to  call  him  a  prophet  who  was  not  a  prophet:  as  if  many 
things  were  not  spoken  of  in  the  Sacred  Scriptures  according 
to  the  opinion  of  that  age,  in  which  the  events  are  related,  and 
not  according  to  the  intrinsic  truth  of  the  thing  itself  (quasi  non 
multa  in  Scripturis  Sanctis  dicantur  juxta  opinionem  illius 
temporis  quo  gesta  referuntur,  et  non  juxta  quod  rei  Veritas 
continebat) .  Even  Joseph  is  called  in  the  Gospel  the  father 
of  the  Lord.'^     A  little  further  in  his  commentary  on  Jer. 

XXIX,  5  ff.,  St.  Jerome  repeats:  ''How  could  Holy  Scrip- 
ture thus  call  him  a  prophet,  although  it  is  denied  in  Holy 
Scripture  itself  that  he  had  been  sent  by  the  Lord?  But 
truth  and  the  law  of  history  is  observed,  as  we  said  before,  not 
according  to  what  was,  but  according  to  what  was  believed  at 
that  time  (Sed  historic  Veritas  et  ordo  servatur,  sicut  praedix- 
imus,  non  juxta  quod  erat,  sed  juxta  id  quod  illo  tempore 
putabatur." 


184  ST.  JEROME 

In  the  first  place  it  is  a  strange  process  to  appeal  to 
Jerome  as  supreme  judge  to  decide  a  matter  of  criticism. 
Jerome  was  of  impulsive  temperament,  often  expressed  his 
opinions  hastily,  and  often  contradicts  himself.  No  Catholic 
accepts  his  theoretical  views  on  the  deuterocanonical  books. 
Hence  we  might  set  aside  this  testimony  by  a  mere  transeat. 
But  it  seems  to  us  that  the  ecole  large  have  stretched  its 
application  far  beyond  what  Jerome  intended.  In  the 
Scriptural  passage  itself  there  is  no  difficulty.  Everyone 
knows  that  in  the  Scripture  false  prophets  are  often  called 
prophets.  The  interpreters  of  the  Septuagitnt  were  hyper- 
critical in  substituting  pseudo-prophets,  since  there  was  no 
danger  of  error  in  the  original  text.  Now  if  Jerome's  re- 
mark has  any  point  at  all,  it  must  mean  that  the  Scriptures 
call  these  men  prophets  for  the  reason  that  they  were  com- 
monly so  termed,  and  not  for  the  reason  that  the  people 
believed  them  to  be  true  prophets.  In  his  Commentary  on 
Ezekiel  (M.  t.  XXV.,  Col.  io8)  Jerome  makes  clearer  his 
meaning.  He  there  treats  of  the  same  case,  false  prophets 
(Ezek.  XIII.  i),  and  Jerome  justifies  their  being  called 
prophets  in  the  Scripture :  "Let  it  not  disturb  anyone  that 
they  are  called  prophets;  for  the  Holy  Scripture  usually 
calls  a  prophet  any  one  prophesying;  thus  are  called  the 
prophets  of  Baal,  the  prophets  of  idols,  and  the  prophets  of 
confusion.  And  also  Paul  the  Apostle  calls  the  Greek  poet  a 
prophet  (Titus  I.  12):  'One  of  themselves,  a  prophet  of 
their  own,  said:  Cretans  are  always  liars,  evil  beasts,  idle 
bellies.'  "  It  is  evident  in  Paul's  quotation  that  he  uses 
that  word  prophet  in  a  loose  sense,  meaning  that  the  verse 
of  Epimenides  was  prophetically  true  of  the  Cretans. 
Jerome's  meaning  is  simply  to  justify  the  Scriptural  use  of 
the  word  prophet.  We  do  not  assert  that  his  statement  is 
clear  or  cogent,  but  it  can  not  have  the  wide  application 
that  the  liberal  school  give  it 

Let  us  hear  how  St.  Jerome  explains  the  fact  that  in 
Holy  Scripture,  St.  Joseph  is  called  the  father  of  Christ ;  and 
the  Virgin  Mary  the  wife  of  St.  Joseph.  [*' Ad  versus  Helvi- 
dium,"  n.  4.] 


ST.  JEROME  185 

'*  Excepting  Joseph  and  Elizabeth  and  Mary  herself, 
and  some  few  others  who,  we  may  suppose,  heard  the  truth 
from  them,  all  considered  Jesus  to  be  the  Son  of  Joseph.  And 
so  far  was  this  the  case  that  even  the  Evangelists,  expressing 
the  opinion  of  the  people,  which  is  the  true  law  of  history  (quae 
vera  historias  lex  est),  called  him  the  father  of  the  Saviour: 
as,  for  instance,  'And  he  (that  is,  Simeon)  came  in  the  Spirit 
into  the  temple ;  and  when  the  parents  brought  in  the  child 
Jesus ;'  and  elsewhere,  'And  his  parents  went  every  year  to 
Jerusalem.'  And  afterwards,  'The  boy  Jesus  tarried  behind 
in  Jerusalem  and  his  parents  knew  not  of  it.'  Observe  also 
that  Mary  herself,  who  had  replied  to  Gabriel  with  the  words : 
'How  shall  this  be,  since  I  know  not  man?"  says  concerning 
Joseph:  'Son  why  hast  thou  thus  dealt  with  us?  behold, 
thy  father  and  I  sought  thee  sorrowing.'  We  have  not  here, 
as  many  maintain,  the  utterance  of  Jews  or  mockers.  The 
Evangelists  call  Joseph  father ;  Mary  says  he  was  father.  Not , 
as  I  said  before,  that  Joseph  was  really  the  father  of  the 
Saviour:  but  that,  to  preserve  the  reputation  of  Mary,  he 
was  regarded  by  all  as  his  father.  .  .  .  But  we  have  said 
enough,  more  with  the  aim  of  imparting  instruction 
than  of  answering  an  opponent,  to  show  why  Joseph  is  called 
the  father  of  our  Lord,  and  why  Mary  is  called  Joseph's 
wife.' 

In  his  commentary  on  St.  Matthew  XIV.,  9,  St.  Jerome 
applies  the  same  principle,  which  he  calls  "the  law  of  history," 
to  the  statement  read  in  the  Gospel  that  King  Herod  ''was 
struck  sad,''  because  the  daughter  of  Herod ias  said:  "Give 
me  here  in  a  dish  the  head  of  John  the  Baptist." 

St.  Jerome  does  not  believe  that  Herod  was  sorry.  ''It 
is  the  manner  of  Scripture,"  he  says,  'Hhat  the  historian  relates 
the  opinion  of  the  multitude,  as  it  was  commonly  viewed  at 
that  time.  (Consuetudinis  Scripturarum  est  opinionem  mul- 
torum  sic  narret  historicus  quomodo  eo  tempore  ab  omnibus 
credebatur).  As  Joseph  was  called,  even  by  Mary  herself, 
the  father  of  Jesus,  so  here  Herod  is  said  to  have  been  struck 
sad,  because  the  banqueters  thought  he  was.  The  hypocrite 
indeed  and  the  homicide  simulated  sadness  in  his  counte- 
nance, although  he  was  really  joyful  in  his  heart." 


186  MURILLO 

The  best  answer  to  these  two  testimonies  is  to  admit 
that  Jerome  erred  in  both  cases,  and  consequently  his 
opinion  is  based  on  error,  and  is  worthless.  The  Scriptures 
call  Jesus  the  son  of  Joseph,  not  to  accommodate  themselves 
to  a  popular  error,  but  because  he  was  bom  in  a  lawful  wed- 
lock, and  not  of  fornication ;  and  because  Joseph  was  the  real 
husband  of  the  Mother  of  God.  Secondly,  it  is  clear  that 
Jerome  errs  in  believing  that  Herod  was  not  at  heart  sad. 
There  is  not  the  slightest  warrant  for  such  supposition. 
Jerome's  supposition  makes  the  Gospel  ridiculous.  In  fact 
one  of  the  ardent  disciples  of  the  ecole  large  admits  that 
Jerome  is  in  error:  "As  a  matter  of  fact,  we  believe  that, 
not  the  Evangelist,  biit  St.  Jerome  was  mistaken.  King 
Herod  was  indeed  'struck  sad'  because  he  feared  the  people. 
But  his  mistake  does  not  ,  of  course,  touch  our  question 
about  the  exegetic  principle  of  St.  Jerome."  (H.  Poels  in 
Catholic  University  Bulletin,  Jan.,  1905).  How  may 
Catholic  writers  ever  expect  to  harmonize  their  views,  when 
such  argtmients  are  used?  In  order  to  add  authority  to 
their  theory,  they  cite  Jerome's  weaknesses,  of  which  he  had 
many,  as  the  supreme  law  in  this  crisis  of  Catholic  faith. 

It  is  not  our  intention  to  mention  all  those  who  have 
arisen  to  defend  the  Church  on  the  question  of  inspiration. 
Two  however,  deserve  special  mention. 

Fr.  Murillo  [El  Movimiento  Reformista  y  la  Exegesis; 
Razon  y  Fe,  December,  1904;  January,  etc.,  1905,]  has 
published  a  series  of  articles  against  Fr.  von  Hummelauer's 
views  and  all  kindred  theories  of  exegesis.  Among  those 
reasons  which  he  urges  against  the  view  of  Oriental  or 
ancient  history  assumed  by  our  recent  Catholic  apologists, 
he  appeals  to  Cicero's  canon  of  history :  ne  quid  falsi  dicer e 
audeat,  ne  quid  veri  non  audeat :  ne  qua  suspicio  gratiae  sit  in 
scribendo  ne  qua  simultas.  [De  Orat.  11  15.]  Murillo  denies 
that  historical  fiction  or  romance  is  as  effective  as  historical 
truth  for  inculcating  moral  principles ;  he  does  not  see  why 
it  cannot  be  said  that  the  Evangelists  too  related  the  life  of 
Christ  according  to  the  Oriental  historical  method,  if  the 
latter  be  compatible  with  the  character  of  an  inspired  book. 


BILLOT  187 

A  still  more  important  work  in  defense  of  a  safe  and  sane 
theory  of  inspiration  is  the  work  "De  Inspiratione  Sacrae 
Scripturae,  Romae,  1903,"  by  Fr.  L.  Billot,  S.  J. 

After  reviewing  the  various  forms  under  which  the  new 
doctrines  present  themselves,  Billot  declares  them  to  be 
contrary  to  the  attributes  of  God  and  to  the  veracity  of  the 
Scriptures.  He  takes  up  their  principles  as  follows :  'Their 
first  principle  is  that  the  inspired  writers  were  neither  more 
nor  less  than  profane  writers.  This  is  false;  for  an  instru- 
mental cause  is  not  in  the  same  category  of  causality  as  a 
principal  cause.  Profane  writers  are  the  principal  cause  of 
their  works ;  while  the  inspired  writers  are  only  the  instru- 
mental cause  of  their  works :  therefore  there  is  no  parity. 

''Their  second  principle  is  that  it  pertains  to  the  inspired 
writers  to  determine  the  literary  form  of  their  books.  This 
is  false,  for  the  reason  that  it  pertains  to  the  principal  author 
to  determine  the  species  of  truth  which  is  to  be  presented  in  a 
book,  and  sought  therein.  For  our  literary  critics  have  in 
mind  that  literary  form  on  which  the  whole  sense  of  the  book 
depends,  and  which  is  the  directive  principle  of  the  entire 
interpretation.  Therefore  it  is  the  literary  form  which  de- 
termines the  character  of  the  book.  Now  if  that  by  which 
a  book  receives  its  specific  character  be  not  from  God,  but 
from  man,  how  is  God  the  principal  Author? 

'Their  third  principle  is  that  there  is  no  literary  form  re- 
ceived among  men  which  the  inspiration  of  the  Holy  Ghost 
rejects.  This  is  false,  if  it  be  understood  of  the  literary 
forms  which  they  imagine,  especially  that  unspeakable 
genius  of  Oriental  history.  ...  It  is  false  for  the  reason 
that  divine  inspiration  can  not  accept  our  defects,  our  ignor- 
ance, our  vices,  our  rashness,  our  vanity.  For  the  genus  of 
literature,  which  they  imagine,  more  properly  should  be 
called  a  genus  of  vanity,  wherein  there  is  no  excuse;  or  if 
there  be  an  excuse,  ignorance  must  excuse  the  error,  and 
rashness  the  ignorance.  Now  God  corrects  our  defects  but 
does  not  accept  them.  And  if  we  appeal  to  the  simile  which 
the  new  biblicists  employ,  the  Word  made  flesh  did  not 
assume  any  of  the  defects  which  springing  from  sin  take 
away  something  of  the  plenitude  of  knowledge  and  grace ; 


188  BILLOT 

but  he  dwelt  among  us  full  of  grace  and  truth.  Much  less 
therefore  in  that  operation  (inspiration)  which  is  proper 
not  to  his  assumed  nature,  but  to  his  divine  nature  can  he 
participate  in  our  defects  by  inspiring  books  of  primitive 
myths  and  Oriental  history."  Here  Billot  especially  aims 
to  overthrow  the  theory  of  Loisy: 

"La  verite  divine,  pour  se  manifester  aux  hommes,  s'est 
"incamee  comme  le  Verbe  etemel.  Le  Fils  de  Dieu  nous  est 
**devenu  semblable  en  tout,  sauf  le  peche.  Et  la  Bible 
"aussi  resemble  en  toutes  choses  k  un  livre  de  I'antiquite 
''qui  aurait  6te  redige  dans  les  memes  conditions  historiques, 
**k  I'exception  d'un  seul  defaut  qui  la  rendrait  impropre  k 
"sa  destination  providentielle,  et  ce  defaut  serait  I'enseigne- 
"ment  formel  d'une  .  .  erreur  quelconque  presentee  comme 
"verite  divine.  Mais.  ...  les  interpretes  de  la  revelation 
"divine  .  .  .  se  sont  conformes  aux  procedes  litteraires 
"employes  de  leur  temps,  et  ils  ont  moule  en  quelque  sorte 
"la  verite  revelee  dans  le  cadre  des  opinions  communes  et 
"  des  traditions  de  leur  race,  sa\if  k  rectifier  dans  ces  donnees 
".  .  .  ce  qui  pouvait  contredire  les  principes  essentiels  de 
"la  verite  religieuse."     Loisy,  Etudes  bibliques,  p.  34. 

Billot  severely  handles  the  theory  of  implicit  quotations : 
"Let  us  now  come  to  the  implicit  quotations  which  are  a 
great  part  of  the  new  invention.  .  .  .  Under  the  name 
of  an  implicit  quotation  is  understood  the  tacit  employment 
of  a  document  which  the  author  inserts  in  his  narration  on 
its  own  authority,  and  for  whose  truth  the  author  does  not 
vouch.  .  .  .  Whatever  literary  form  be  supposed,  what- 
ever customs  and  conventions  prevailing  in  different  times 
and  places,  we  must  always  believe  in  our  hearts  and  confess 
that  the  holy  books  were  written  at  the  dictation  of  the 
Holy  Ghost,  and  indeed  the  entire  books  and  all  their  parts, 
and  therefore  all  and  every  one  of  the  so  called  implicit 
quotations.  For  if  a  properly  so  called  explicit  quotation 
is  a  true  part  of  a  book  which  proceeds  from  the  author  as 
any  other  part  .  .  .  how  rauch  the  more  an  implicit  quota- 
tion which  is  incorporated  into  the  body  of  the  narration 
without  any  reference?  It  must  be  conceded  therefore 
that  the  implicit  quotations  were  inserted  by  the  inspired 


INSPIRATION  189 

writers  not  of  their  own  motive  and  industry,  but  under  the 
direction  of  God.  .  .  .  The  human  writer  finds  a  docu- 
ment of  whose  value  he  is  ignorant;  nevertheless  he  copies 
it,  and  inserts  it  into  his  narration,  taking  a  certain  risk, 
judging  that  in  any  case  he  may  be  excused,  partly  on  ac- 
count of  a  prestimptive  probabiUty  of  the  veracity  of  the 
document,  partly  on  account  of  the  considerations  which 
our  critics  have  ingeniously  invented;  let  this  pass.  But 
what  shall  we  judge  of  him  to  whom  the  falsity  of  the  docu- 
ment is  known,  and  who  notwithstanding  this  certain  con- 
science, should  insert  this  document  into  his  narration? 
Shall  we  forsooth  distinguish  historical  honesty  into  western 
and  Eastern?  into  ancient  and  modem?  In  this  case  even 
Oriental  honesty  would  hardly  be  preserved.  Wherefore 
since  God  is  neither  western  nor  eastern,  neither  ancient 
nor  modem ;  since  moreover  those  things  which  are  false  he 
does  not  apprehend  as  probably  possibly  true,  but  cer- 
tainly knows  them  to  be  false ;  since  finally  with  him  avail 
nothing  those  usages  and  conventions  which  the  ignorance 
or  vanity  of  men  has  introduced,  we  understand  how  from- 
his  dictation  there  can  not  come  forth  an  implicit  quota- 
tion of  a  false  document.  And  therefore  from  first  to  last, 
the  doctrine  of  implicit  quotations,  understood  in  the  sense 
and  to  the  end  that  the  new  exegetes  understand  it,  most 
evidently  is  to  be  rejected. 

''Let  the  final  conclusion  be  that  in  treating  of  literary 
forms  they  would  argue  more  wisely  if  instead  of  seeking  a 
genus  of  literature  in  which  to  place  the  Holy  Books  they 
would  acknowledge  that  the  Holy  Scriptures  form  a  genus 
apart,  transcendent,  imlike  all  other  books.  .  .  .  It  is 
fitting  that  the  books  of  which  God  is  the  principal  Author 
should  have  a  manner  of  speech  proper  to  themselves." 

The  examination  of  the  various  theories  of  inspiration 
has  brought  us  now  to  a  point  where  we  must  adopt  certain 
principles  as  our  working  theory  of  inspiration.  Most  of 
the  adherents  of  the  new  exegesis  in  investigating  the  nature 
of  inspiration  make  their  point  of  departure  not  the  action 
of  God  in  inspiration,  but  the  books  themselves.  In  this 
there  is  excess.     Inspiration  is  a  supernatural  effect,  and  is 


190  SPECIES    OF   LITERATURE 

not  revealed  to  us  by  the  books  themselves,  but  comes  to  us 
from  God  through  the  founts  of  revelation.  Therefore  we 
can  not  build  up  a  theory  of  inspiration  a  posteriori  from  an 
examination  of  the  books  themselves.  The  process  is  legiti- 
mate to  study  the  books  to  see  what  effects  the  action  of 
God  works  in  them ;  but  there  must  always  be  the  directive 
principle  in  our  minds  that  these  books  were  written  under 
the  inspiration  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  have  God  for  their 
Author. 

In  seeking  the  nature  of  inspiration  we  must  separate  it 
from  extraneous  questions.  The  Church  does  not  admit  as 
inspired,  any  writing  of  later  origin  than  the  Apostles. 
This  has  been  a  consistent  teaching  of  the  Church.  But  if 
this  principle  be  accepted,  the  question  of  inspiration  does 
not  occupy  itself  with  the  question:  Who  are  the  authors 
of  the  inspired  books?  Neither  does  it  concern  inspiration 
to  discern  whether  a  book  be  of  one  human  author  or  of 
many.  To  treat  of  the  human  authors  is  a  separate  question . 
Inspiration  is  sure  of  one  divine  Author ;  but  it  is  not  essen- 
tial to  it  to  define  its  htiman  authors.  At  times  it  has  done  it, 
but  only  per  accidens.  Certain  books,  as  many  of  St.  Paul's 
epistles,  declare  their  human  authorship  under  the  guarantee 
of  divine  inspiration ;  of  other  books  the  authors  will  ever 
remain  unknown;  of  some,  the  authorship  is  merely  prob- 
able. 

Fr.  Christian  Pesch  believes  that  no  genus  of  literature 
is  per  se  excluded  from  inspiration.  It  seems  to  us  that 
this  principle  needs  some  restrictions.  By  the  fact  of  in- 
spiration the  Holy  Books  are  unlike  all  other  books.  They 
are  a  transcendent  genus  of  literature.  Their  modes  of 
presenting  truth  may  have  affinities  with  the  various  forms 
of  literature;  but  there  is  not  an  identity.  And  moreover 
there  are  certain  species  of  literature  whose  end  seems  to  be 
incompatible  with  the  end  of  Scripture.  For  instance  the 
epic  poem  is  based  on  mythical  heroes,  and  we  can  find  no 
place  in  the  plan  and  purpose  of  the  Holy  Scripture  for  the 
epic  poem. 

The  novel  is  a  fictitious  prose  narrative  or  tale,  involving 
some  plot  of  more  or  less  intricacy,  and  aiming  to  present  a 


SPECIES    OF   LITERATURE  191 

picture  of  real  life  in  the  historical  period  and  society  to 
which  the  persons,  manners,  and  modes  of  speech,  as  well  as 
the  scenery  and  surroundings  are  supposed  to  belong.  We 
look  in  vain  in  this  definition  for  anything  which  could  have 
been  the  aim  of  any  of  the  Holy  Books. 

The  fable  is  a  story  or  history  untrue  in  fact  or  sub- 
stance, invented  or  developed  by  popular  or  poetic  fancy  or 
superstition,  and  to  some  extent  or  at  one  time  current  in 
popular  belief  as  true  and  real.  Now  rigorously  speaking 
perhaps  we  may  apply  the  term  to  some  portions  of  Holy 
Writ.  Lexicographers  tell  us  that  the  parable  is  a  species  of 
fable.  But  certainly  the  fable  as  popularly  understood 
finds  no  place  in  Scripture. 

There  are  two  species  of  literature  which  we  believe  must 
absolutely  be  excluded  from  Scripture.  The  legend  is  an 
unauthentic  and  improbable  or  non-historical  narrative 
handed  down  from  early  times.  It  is  the  product  of  a 
people's  imagination,  a  mere  creation  of  fancy.  Some 
legends  teach  moral  truth,  but  not  as  we  expect  it  to  be 
taught  in  Holy  Scripture.  Once  admit  the  presence  of 
legends  in  the  Scriptures  and  the  basis  of  the  Holy  Scriptures 
is  shaken.  Parables  and  allegories  are  also  fictitious  history, 
but  of  another  kind.  The  parable  openly  bears  evidence 
that  it  is  a  species  of  similitude :  in  the  allegory,  one  thing 
true  and  real  is  described  under  the  image  of  another.  In 
parables  and  allegories  the  symbolical  character  of  the  nar- 
rative is  distinctly  recognized. 

Still  more  do  we  exclude  from  Holy  Scripture  the  myth, 
which  is  false  history  believed  to  be  true.  It  is  imaginary 
history  having  no  existence  in  fact.  It  is  not  aimed  to  point 
a  moral;  it  only  expresses  a  people's  superstitious  concep- 
tions of  primitive  history.  We  believe  that  the  divine  ele- 
ment of  inspiration  excludes  from  Holy  Scriptures  the  novel, 
the  fable  in  its  popular  sense,  the  epic  poem,  the  legend,  and 
the  myth.  And  the  reason  is  that  they  are  not  true,  and 
the  Scriptures  are  true. 

These  forms  of  literature  being  excluded,  there  remain 
many  other  forms  of  literature  which  Holy  Writ  employs, 
and  consequently  the  divine  influence  manifests  itself  in 


192  PROPHECY 

Holy  Scripture  in  different  modes.  We  find  in  Jeremiah  a 
good  description  of  the  manner  in  which  the  Holy  Ghost 
delivers  a  written  prophecy.  We  do  not  say  that  all  proph- 
ecy in  the  strict  sense  was  delivered  in  this  way ;  but  it  is  a 
representative  specimen : 

'  'And  it  came  to  pass  in  the  fourth  year  of  Jehoiakim  the 
son  of  Josiah,  king  of  Judah,  that  this  word  came  imto  Jere- 
miah from  the  Lord,  saying,  Take  thee  a  roll  of  a  book,  and 
write  therein  all  the  words  that  I  have  spoken  unto  thee 
against  Israel,  and  against  Judah,  and  against  all  the  nations, 
from  the  day  I  spake  unto  thee,  from  the  days  of  Josiah, 
even  unto  this  day.  It  may  be  that  the  house  of  Judah 
will  hear  all  the  evil  which  I  purpose  to  do  unto  them ;  that 
they  may  return  every  man  from  his  evil  way ;  that  I  may 
forgive  their  iniquity  and  their  sin.  Then  Jeremiah  called 
Baruch  the  son  of  Neriah ;  and  Baruch  wrote  from  the  mouth 
of  Jeremiah  all  the  words  of  the  Lord,  which  he  had  spoken 
unto  him,  upon  a  roll  of  a  book."  [Jer.  XXXVI.,  1-4.] 

Jeremiah  executes  the  command,  and  Baruch  reads  the 
message.  Then  the  princes  ask  the  manner  of  the  com- 
munication from  Heaven:  "And  they  asked  Baruch,  say- 
ing. Tell  us  now,  How  didst  thou  write  all  these  words  at 
his  mouth?  Then  Baruch  answered  them.  He  pronounced 
all  these  words  imto  me  with  his  mouth."     [Jer.  XXXVI. 

17-18.] 

King  Jehoiakim  bums  the  scroll,  and  God  commands  that 
another  be  written: 

"Then  the  word  of  the  Lord  came  to  Jeremiah,  after  that 
the  king  had  burned  the  roll,  and  the  words  which  Baruch 
wrote  at  the  mouth  of  Jeremiah,  saying.  Take  thee  again 
another  roll,  and  write  in  it  all  the  former  words  that  were 
in  the  first  roll,  which  Jehoiakim  the  king  of  Judah  hath 
burned.  And  concerning  Jehoiakim  king  of  Judah  thou 
shalt  say.  Thus  saith  the  Lord:  Thou  hast  burned  this  roll, 
saying.  Why  hast  thou  written  therein,  saying,  The  king  of 
Babylon  shall  certainly  come  and  destroy  this  land,  and 
shall  cause  to  cease  from  thence  man  and  beast?  There- 
fore thus  saith  the  Lord  concerning  Jehoiakim  king  of  Judah : 
He  shall  have  none  to  sit  upon  the  throne  of  David :  and  his 


GOD   THE   AU^^THOR   OF    SCRIPTURE  193 

dead  body  shall  be  cast  out  in  the  day  to  the  heat,  and  in 
the  night  to  the  frost.  And  I  will  punish  him  and  his  seed 
and  his  servants  for  their  iniquity;  and  I  will  bring  upon 
them,  and  upon  the  inhabitants  of  Jerusalem,  and  upon  the 
men  of  Judah,  all  the  evil  that  I  have  pronounced  against 
them,  but  they  hearkened  not.  Then  took  Jeremiah  another 
roll,  and  gave  it  to  Baruch  the  scribe,  the  son  of  Neriah; 
who  wrote  therein  fom  the  mxouth  of  Jeremiah  all  the  words 
of  the  book  which  Jehoiakim  king  of  Judah  had  burned  in 
the  fire :  and  there  were  added  besides  unto  them  many  like 
words."     [Jer.  XXXVI.  27—32.] 

While  the  direct  influence  of  God  here  is  most  potent,  it 
does  not  justify  a  mechanical  theory  of  verbal  inspiration. 
God's  message  came  to  the  Prophet  in  mental  words ;  as  it 
came  forth  from  Jeremiah's  lips  the  impress  of  God  was  upon 
thoughts  and  words ;  but  still  it  is  not  necessary  to  make  the 
mind  of  Jeremiah  act  as  a  mere  phonograph.  Intellect  and 
memory  exercised  their  proper  functions  in  receiving  and 
delivering  the  words  of  God.  It  is  evident  from  the  account 
that  the  consigning  of  it  to  writing  did  not  take  place  at  the 
very  moment  that  God  spoke  to  the  prophet.  Jeremiah 
received  the  message,  and  his  memory  preserved  it.  In  re- 
producing it  for  writing,  his  memory  was  supernaturally 
aided  by  God ;  but  there  is  no  warrant  for  multiplying  mir- 
acles to  the  extent  that  every  word  be  placed  ready  made  in 
Jeremiah's  mind.  In  dealing  with  this  subtle  action  of  God 
it  is  difficult  to  describe  in  words  the  mental  processes  with 
which  God  co-operates.  We  may  ilkistrate  by  an  example. 
Let  us  suppose  that  the  same  identical  message  came  to 
Jeremiah  and  to  another  prophet;  and  that  both  executed 
the  command  to  write  it.  In  the  two  accounts  we  should 
expect  to  find  the  same  modal  differences  that  are  found 
in  the  several  accounts  of  the  words  of  institution  of  the 
Blessed  Sacrament  at  the  Last  Supper. 

In  investigating  the  nature  of  inspiration  we  have  the 
certain  principle  that  God  is  the  principal  Author  of  Holy 
Scripture,  and  that  the  human  authors  are  the  instrumental 
causes.  It  follows  also  that  they  are  living  rational  in- 
struments, and  in  conformity  with  the  certain  theological 

(13)  H.  s 


194  REVELATION 

principle,  God  employed  the  faculties  of  these  instruments 
to  write  the  Holy  Books.  Inasmuch  as  these  created  facul- 
ties were  incapable  of  effecting  the  Holy  Books,  God  elevated 
and  strengthened  them,  and  thus  used  them  to  deliver  his 
message,  so  that  one  effect  the  Holy  Books,  comes  forth 
from  a  double  causality.  This  action  of  God  thus  enabling 
a  man  to  accomplish  a  writing  above  his  natural  powers  is 
aptly  called  charismatic.  The  Church  has  done  more  than 
tell  us  that  God  has  inspired  the  writers  of  Scripture;  St. 
Thomas,  St.  Gregory  the  Great,  the  author  of  the  Imitation 
of  Christ,  and  many  others  have  been  given  of  the  grace  of 
God  which  might  truly  be  called  inspiration;  but  the  in- 
spiration which  moved  the  human  authors  of  the  Bible  was 
of  that  nature  that  it  made  God  the  Author  of  the  Scriptures : 
they  are  the  word  of  God.  By  this  definition  of  inspiration 
the  negative  theory  of  inspiration  of  Chrismann  and  Jahn 
is  excluded.  Neither  could  a  subsequent  approbation  by  the 
Church  give  to  any  book  the  character  which  the  Church 
infallibly  declares  to  belong  to  her  canonical  books.  As 
Franzelin  rightly  declared  in  the  Vatican  Cotincil:  ''Be- 
cause the  Church  is  infallible  she  can  define  nothing  as 
revealed  truth  which  is  not  revealed  by  God;  and  in  like 
manner  through  the  same  charisma  of  infallibility  she  can 
not  put  any  book  in  the  Canon  of  Holy  Scripture  which  was 
not  divinely  inspired."  (Coll.  Lac.  VII.  162 1).  It  can  not  be 
argued  against  this  theory  that  St.  Paul  thus  approved  the 
sayings  of  Aratus  and  Epimenides  (Acts  XVII.  28;  Titus 
I.  12).  St.  Paul  not  only  approves  these  sayings,  but  by 
incorporating  them  into  his  book  makes  them  a  part  of  his 
book.  God  is  not  the  Author  of  those  sayings  as  existing  in 
the  works  of  the  two  poets ;  but  he  is  the  Author  of  the  cita- 
tion of  them  and  the  approbation  of  them  by  which  they 
became  an  integral  part  of  an  inspired  book. 

In  every  question  there  are  two  extremes.  So  here  in 
defending  full  inspiration  for  the  Holy  Books,  we  must  not 
r\m  into  the  other  extreme. 

We  have  said  before  that  revelation  does  not  enter  into 
the  essence  of  inspiration.  We  mean  here  revelation  in 
the  strict  sense.     This  takes  place  when  God  directly  in- 


REVELATION  195 

fuses  the  ideas  into  a  created  mind,  as  in  the  Prophets  and 
the  Apocalypse  of  St.  John.  But  there  is  an  influence  of 
God  wherein  he  enlightens  the  mind  better  to  receive  and 
use  naturally  acquired  knowledge.  This  is  sometimes  called 
revelation  in  a  wide  sense.  It  is  clear  that  this  is  always 
present  in  inspiration.  Sometimes  this  distinction  is  not 
adverted  to,  and  the  divine  influence  in  Holy  Scripture  is 
spoken  of  as  revelation.  It  is  clearly  evident  that  revelation, 
strictly  speaking,  does  not  extend  to  all  the  Scriptures. 
Often  the  writers  indicate  their  human  sources.  The  annals 
of  the  Kingdoms  of  Judah  and  Israel  are  in  large  part  the 
indicated  sources  of  the  Books  of  Kings.  In  the  Books  of 
Chronicles  we  find  sixteen  different  documents  cited  as 
sources.  The  writer  of  II.  Maccabees  certainly  employed 
existing  documents ;  and  St.  Luke  asserts  that  he  had  gath- 
ered his  materials  from  others. 

St.  Thomas  clearly  explains  this  doctrine  of  the  Church 
as  follows:  "If  into  the  mind  of  a  man  light  be  infused  by 
God,  not  for  the  purpose  of  knowing  certain  supernatural 
things,  but  that  he  may  know  with  the  certitude  of  divine 
truth  things  which  can  be  known  by  human  reason,  that 
species  of  prophecy  is  inferior  to  that  which  by  mental 
visions  imparts  the  knowledge  of  supernatural  truth,  which 
(later)  prophecy  all  they  had  who  are  placed  in  the  order  of 
Prophets,  for  they  fulfilled  the  prophetic  office.  Where- 
fore, they  spoke  in  the  person  of  God,  saying  to  the  people : 
'Thus  saith  the  Lord ;'  but  the  hagio graphs  spoke  not  so,  for 
most  of  them  spoke  in  most  part  of  those  things  which  can 
be  known  by  himian  reason,  and  (they  spoke)  not  in  the 
person  of  God,  but  as  men,  but  with  the  help  of  divine 
light."  (2.  2.  q.  173,  a.  4.)  From  the  fact  that  this  divine 
light  is  omnipresent  in  the  Holy  Scriptures  the  whole  Scrip- 
ture is  divinely  revealed,  and  is  the  object  of  divine  faith. 
But  in  this  regard,  we  must  bear  in  mind  the  principle  of  St. 
Thomas:  '*A  thing  pertains  to  the  precept  of  faith  in  two 
ways:  (i)  it  pertains  to  faith  directly  as  the  articles  of 
faith  which  are  promulgated  to  be  believed  for  their  own 
sake.  .  .  .  (2)  Other  things  pertain  to  faith  indirectly,^ 
inasmuch  as  they  are  not  proposed  to  be  believed  for  their 


196  THE  DIVINE  AFFLATUS 

own  sake,  but  for  the  reason  that  from  the  negation  of 
these,  something  would  follow  contrary  to  faith,  as  for  in- 
stance if  one  should  deny  that  Isaac  was  Abraham's  son, 
there  would  follow  something  contrary  to  faith,  viz.,  that 
the  Scripture  contains  falsehood."  (I.  Cor.  XI.  4). 

This  teaching  is  of  value  against  those  who  would  re- 
strict inspiration  to  things  of  faith  and  morals.  It  is  true 
that  our  act  of  faith  more  immediately  finds  its  object  in 
the  things  of  faith  and  morals;  but  it  embraces  this  other 
equally  immediate  truth :  We  believe  all  that  God  has  re- 
vealed (in  the  broad  sense).  Therefore  the  things  revealed 
per  accidens  are  included  in  our  act  of  faith.  Of  course  our 
act  of  faith  presupposes  the  application  of  true  hermeneu- 
tics  to  determine  what  is  the  true  sense  of  the  things  not  yet 
defined  by  the  Church. 

To  produce  a  book  the  author  must  conceive  the  ideas  in 
his  mind  and  consign  them  to  writing  either  in  person  or  by 
another.  Therefore  in  employing  man  as  an  instrument  to 
execute  a  writing,  God  must  illumine  his  mind  in  the  very 
act  of  conceiving  the  thoughts.  This  illumination  will  be 
a  strict  revelation  in  certain  cases,  as  before  explained ;  in 
things  of  natural  reason  or  even  mysteries  learned  through 
natural  means  it  will  be  revelation  in  the  larger  sense,  and 
both  degrees  of  God's  action  are  inspiration. 

God  also  moves  the  will  of  the  author  to  write,  and  assists 
him  so  that  he  properly  executes  the  writing  in  a  manner 
worthy  of  the  word  of  God.  Not  alone  by  an  internal 
moving  of  the  will  does  God  bring  about  the  writing — he 
uses  external  circumstances  and  agents.  Thus  the  things 
impelling  to  write  may  be  friendship,  or  a  special  request, 
or  a  special  need  of  a  particular  church,  etc.  But  with  the 
natural  knowledge  of  the  things  to  be  written  and  with  the 
natural  motives  impelling  to  write,  God  co-operates,  strength- 
ening the  intelligence,  and  moving  the  free  will  so  that  there 
is  inevitably  produced  a  book  which  God  wills  to  be  his  word, 
inspired  and  free  from  error. 

It  is  not  difficult  to  understand  why  God  should  illumine 
the  created  intelligence  even  in  the  act  of  writing  things 
naturally  known.     Without  the  help  of  God,  man  could  not 


THE   DIVINE   AFFLATUS  197 

impress  upon  his  writings  the  stamp  of  absolute  infallible 
truth,  even  in  the  things  which  he  knows  by  his  own  industry. 
We  know  that  at  times  we  experience  a  greater  intellectual 
vigor,  and  that  we  can  then  judge  better,  and  write  better. 
In  dealing  with  natural  phenomena,  or  with  the  events  of 
history,  one  writer  is  more  accurate  than  another ;  one  writer 
is  better  able  to  judge  of  the  nature  of  things  and  events  and 
of  their  relations.  In  inspiration  God's  action  gives  the 
strength  necessary  to  deliver  adequately  God's  message. 

God's  action  on  the  will  of  the  inspired  writer  is  both 
physical  and  moral.  Inasmuch  as  God  as  the  principal 
Author  wills  to  deliver  to  men  a  certain  definite  message 
through  the  instrumentality  of  the  inspired  writer,  there 
corresponds  to  this  will  of  God  a  charismatic  physical  mo- 
tion of  the  will  of  the  inspired  writer  which  does  not  de- 
prive it  of  liberty.  The  human  will — thus  moved  by  God 
still  retains  the  absolute  power  to  resist.  The  moral  in- 
fluence of  God  at  times  may  be  a  direct  command  to  write 
as  was  given  to  some  of  the  writers.  In  more  instances  it 
will  consist  in  a  supernatural  illumination  of  the  mind  by 
which  it  conceives  ideas  and  judgments  which  impel  a  man 
to  write. 

The  delivering  of  the  books  to  the  Church  is  not  an 
essential  of  inspiration,  but  supposes  it.  We  cannot  say 
that  God  ordained  the  delivery  of  the  books  to  the  Church 
as  an  absolute  end  in  giving  inspiration;  for  some  inspired 
books  have  been  lost.  The  purpose  of  inspiration  was  to 
deliver  a  message  of  salvation  to  the  world,  and  the  ordi- 
nary custodian  of  that  message  is  the  Church. 

We  may  distinguish  three  elements  in  God's  action  in  in- 
spiration, God  supernaturally  illumines  the  intellect  to 
conceive  rightly  the  truths ;  He  moves  the  will  to  write 
faithfully  these  truths ;  and  he  assists  the  inspired  writer  to 
give  written  expression  to  these  truths  without  admixture 
of  error. 

It  is  indifferent  to  inspiration  whether  the  inspired  man 
himself  do  the  material  writing  or  execute  it  by  means  of 
an  amanuensis ;  but  in  the  latter  case  the  assistance  of  God 
protects  against  errors  which  would  affect  the  sense  of  the 
propositions. 


198  EXTENT   OF   INSPIRATION 

The  curious  question  is  raised  by  some:  Does  inspira- 
tion admit  of  different  degrees?  as  for  instance:  Is  Isaiah 
more  inspired  than  the  writer  of  the  Books  of  Maccabees? 
This  question  must  be  answered  with  a  distinction.  As  re- 
gards the  essence  of  biblical  inspiration  all  the  books  are 
equal,  and  are  received  by  the  Church  pari  pietatis  affectu 
ac  reverentia.  (Cone.  Trid.  Sess.  4.)  Therefore  one  book 
can  not  be  said  to  be  more  inspired  than  another.  But 
since  the  illumination  of  the  mind  and  the  motion  of  the 
will  are  finite  entities  they  may  admit  of  various  degrees  of 
intensity.  Of  what  degree  was  given  we  know  nothing, 
since  it  is  not  revealed  to  us.  But  it  is  perfectly  compatible 
with  the  right  idea  of  inspiration  that  God  may  have  given 
to  one  a  deeper  insight  into  divine  truth,  a  greater  feeling 
in  expressing  it,  a  poetic  power  in  presenting  it.  These  are 
not  of  the  essence  of  the  inspiration. 

CHAPTER  II. 

EXTENT   OF    INSPIRATION. 

In  all  these  questions  we  seek  first  if  there  be  any  author- 
itative teaching  on  the  subject.  In  the  present  instance  we 
find  that  in  his  universal  proposition,  "all  Scripture  is  in- 
spired," St.  Paul  extends  inspiration  to  all  Scripture.  The 
same  persuasion  is  in  Christ  in  his  use  of  Scripture.  He 
cites  it  as  a  thing  of  absolute  authority :  he  bases  the  great 
proofs  of  his  character  and  mission  on  the  statement:  "It 
is  written."  The  very  fact  that  a  thing  is  written  in 
Holy  Scripture  was  an  absolute  proof.  The  Apostles  and 
other  inspired  writers  did  the  same.  The  Fathers  are  unan- 
imous in  asserting  that  all  Scripture  is  inspired.  The  coun- 
cils of  the  Church  have  defined  this  by  asserting  that  all  the 
books  with  all  their  parts  are  inspired. 

But  now  we  must  see  in  what  sense  all  Scripture  is  in- 
spired. 

The  question  of  the  inspiration  of  Obiter  Dicta  is  a  cele- 
brated one  in  Biblical  Criticism.  Obiter  Dicta  may  be  called 
those  details  of  minor  moment  related  in  Holy  Writ,  which 
are  inserted  en  passant,  not  seemingly  comprised  in  the 
main  scope  and  intention  of  the  writer.     The  passage  in 


OBITER  DICTA  199 

Tobias  XI.  9.  relating  to  the  wagging  of  the  tail  of  Tobias' 
dog:  ''blandimento  suae  caudae  gaudebat,"  and  the  pas- 
sage in  St.  Paul's  letter  to  Timothy,  II.  Tim.  IV.  13.  relat- 
ing to  the  cloak  left  at  Troas:  "Penulam,  quam  reliqui 
Troade  apud  Carpum,  veniens  affer  tecum,"  are  usually 
quoted  as  examples  of  obiter  dicta.  Concerning  these, 
two  questions  may  be  raised :  i .  Are  the  Obiter  Dicta  in- 
spired? 2.  Is  it  of  faith  that  these  are  inspired  ?  Catholic 
theologians  generally  answer  the  first  question  in  the  affirm- 
ative. And,  in  truth,  such  must  be  defended,  for  the  same 
danger  would  menace  us  as  before  mentioned,  were  we  to 
reject  the  inspiration  of  these  passages,  namely,  that  of 
gradually  widening  the  circle  of  these,  and  inducing  un- 
certainty into  the  Scripture,  by  the  freedom  with  which 
men  might  reject  these  details. 

Card.  Newman  asserted  that,  in  his  opinion,  these  w^ere 
not  of  faith.  Patrizi,  quoted  by  Lamy,  and  by  him  fol- 
lowed, does  not  dare  condemn  the  opinion  of  those  who 
deny  that  the  Obiter  Dicta  are  of  faith.  Schmid  says: 
"Credimus  doctrinam  quam  proposuimus  quoad  illam  specia- 
lem  assertionem,  quae  immunitatem  ab  errore,  divinam  auc- 
toritatem,  et  inspirationem  ipsam  ad  res  indifferentes  etiam 
minimas  extendit,  non  esse  de  fide,  et  contrariam  non  esse 
haeresim.  Nihilominus,  persuasum  nobis  est  doctrinam 
nostram  omnino  certam  esse,  nee  contrariam  ullo  modo  proba- 
bilem  aut  tolerabilem  judicamus.'' 

Newman,  in  the  19th  Century  for  1884,  excludes  from  the 
fide  divina  credenda  "obiter  dicta";  such  as,  for  instance, 
that  Nabuchadnezzar  was  king  of  Niniveh,  Judith  I.  7 ;  or 
that  Paul  left  his  cloak  at  Troas ;  or  that  Tobias'  dog  wagged 
his  tail.  Tob.  XI.  9:  "And  here  I  am  led  on  to  inquire 
whether  obiter  dicta  are  conceivable  in  an  inspired  docu- 
ment. We  know  that  they  are  held  to  exist  and  even  re- 
quired in  treating  of  the  dogmatic  utterances  of  Popes,  but 
are  they  compatible  with  inspiration  ?  The  common  opinion 
is  that  they  are  not.  Professor  Lamy  thus  writes  about 
them,  in  the  form  of  an  objection :  'Many  minute  matters 
occur  in  the  sacred  writers  which  have  regard  only  to  human 
feebleness  and  the  natural  necessities  of  life,  and  by  no 


200  OBITER   DICTA 

means  require  inspiration,  since  they  can  otherwise  be  per- 
fectly well  known,  and  seem  scarcely  worthy  of  the  Holy 
Spirit,  as  for  instance,  what  is  said  of  the  dog  of  Tobias,  St. 
Paul's  penula,  and  the  salutations  at  the  end  of  the  Epistles.' 
Neither  he  nor  Fr.  Patrizi  allow  of  these  exceptions;  but 
Fr.  Patrizi,  as  Lamy  quotes  him,  'damnare  non  audet  eos 
qui  haeC'tenerent',  viz.,  exceptions,  and  he  himself,  by  keep- 
ing silence,  seems  unable  to  condemn  them  either. 

By  obiter  dicta  in  Scripture  I  also  mean  such  statements 
as  we  find  in  the  Book  of  Judith,  that  Nabuchodonosor  was 
king  of  Nineveh.  Now  it  is  in  favor  of  there  being  such 
unauthoritative  obiter  dicta,  that  unlike  those  which  occur 
in  dogmatic  utterances  of  Pope  and  Councils,  they  are,  in 
Scripture,  not  doctrinal,  but  mere  unimportant  statements 
of  fact ;  whereas  those  of  Popes  and  Councils  may  relate  to 
faith  and  morals,  and  are  said  to  be  uttered  obiter,  because 
they  are  not  contained  within  the  scope  of  the  formal  defin- 
ition, and  imply  no  intention  of  binding  the  consciences  of 
the  faithful.  There  does  not  then  seem  any  serious  diffi- 
culty in  admitting  their  existence  in  Scripture.  Let  it  be 
observed,  its  miracles  are  doctrinal  facts,  and  in  no  sense  of 
the  phrase  can  be  considered  obiter  dicta." 

The  Fathers  were  concurrent  in  extending  inspiration  to 
everything  contained  in  Holy  Scripture.  *T  believe,"  says 
St.  Augustine,  ''that  no  Sacred  writer  has  been  deceived  in 
anything."  (Epist.  72.  ad  Hieron.)  St.  J.  Chrys.,  Hom. 
XV.  in  Gen.,  says  that  every  word  is  to  be  pondered,  as  they 
are  the  words  of  the  Holy  Ghost  {i.  e.  the  sense  of  the  words.) 
So,  St.  Jerome  reproaches,  for  the  same  reason,  those  who 
do  not  receive  the  Epistle  to  Philemon.  St.  Thomas,  Summa 
Theol.  1.  Q.  I.  art.  10.  ad.  3.:  'Tt  is  evident  that  there 
never  can  be  falsehood  contained  in  the  literal  sense,"  and 
Q.  32.  art.  4:  "A  thing  pertains  to  faith  in  two  w^ays.  In 
one  way,  directly,  as  those  things  which  are  principally  co- 
signed  to  us ;  as  for  instance,  that  God  is  triune.  Things  per- 
tain indirectly  to  faith,  from  whose  contrary  would  follow 
something  pernicious  to  faith;  as,  for  instance,  if  one  were 
to  say  that  Samuel  were  not  the  son  of  Helcana;  for  from 
this  it  would  follow  that  the  Scriptures  were  false." 


OBITER   DICTA  201 

The  encyclical  "Providentissimus  Deus"  in  express 
terms  condems  the  theory  that  exempts  the  obiter  dicta  from, 
inspiration:  "But  it  is  absolutely  wrong  and  forbidden 
either  to  narrow  inspiration  to  certain  parts  only  of  Hol}^ 
Scripture,  or  to  admit  that  the  Sacred  Writer  has  erred. 
For  the  system  of  those  who,  in  order  to  rid  themselves  of 
those  difficulties,  do  not  hesitate  to  concede  that  Divine  in- 
spiration regards  the  things  of  faith  and  morals,  and  nothing 
beyond,  because  (as  they  wrongly  think),  in  a  question  of 
the  truth  or  falsehood  of  a  passage,  we  should  consider  not 
so  much  what  God  has  said  as  the  reason  and  purpose  which 
He  had  in  mind  when  saying  it — this  system  cannot  be 
tolerated.  For  all  the  Books  which  the  Church  receives  as 
sacred  and  canonical  are  written  wholly  and  entirely,  with 
all  their  parts,  at  the  dictation  of  the  Holy  Ghost ;  and  so  far 
is  it  from  being  possible  that  any  error  can  co-exist  with 
inspiration,  that  inspiration  not  only  is  essentially  incom- 
patible with  error,  but  excludes  and  rejects  it  as  absolutely 
and  necessarily  as  it  is  impossible  that  God  Himself,  the 
Supreme  Truth,  can  utter  that  which  is  not  true.  This  is 
the  ancient  and  unchanging  faith  of  the  Church  solemnly 
defined  in  the  councils  of  Florence  and  of  Trent,  and  finally 
confirmed  and  more  expressly  formulated  by  the  Council  of 
the  Vatican.  These  are  the  words  of  the  last :  'The  Books 
of  the  Old  and  New  Testament,  whole  and  entire,  with  all 
their  parts,  as  enimierated  by  the  decree  of  the  same  Council 
(Trent)  and  in  the  ancient  Latin  Vulgate,  are  to  be  received 
as  Sacred  and  Canonical.  And  the  Church  holds  them  as 
Sacred  and  Canonical,  not  because  having  been  composed 
by  himian  industry,  they  were  afterwards  approved  by  her 
authority ;  nor  only  because  they  contain  revelation  without 
error;  but  because,  having  been  written  under  the  inspira- 
tion of  the  Holy  Ghost,  they  have  God  for  their  Author.' 
[Sess.  in.  C.  II.  de  Rev.]  Hence,  because  the  Holy 
Ghost  employed  men  as  His  instruments,  we  cannot,  there- 
fore, say  that  it  was  these  inspired  instruments  who,  per- 
chance, have  fallen  into  error,  and  not  the  primary  Author. 
For,  by  supernatural  power,  He  so  moved  and  impelled  them 
to  write— He  was  so  present  to  them — that  the  things  which 


202  OBITER  DICTA 

He  ordered,  and  those  only,  they  first  rightly  understood, 
then  willed  faithfully  to  write  down,  and  finally  expressed  in 
apt  words  and  with  infallible  truth.  Otherwise,  it  could 
not  be  said  that  He  was  the  Author  of  the  entire  Scripture. 
Such  has  always  been  the  persuasion  of  the  Fathers.  There- 
fore,' says  St.  Augustine,  'since  they  wrote  the  things  which 
He  showed  and  uttered  to  them,  it  cannot  be  pretended 
that  He  is  not  the  Writer;  for  His  members  executed  what 
their  Head  dictates.'  [De  consensu  Evangel.  L.  i,  C.  35.] 
And  St.  Gregory  the  Great  thus  pronounces:  'most  super- 
flous  it  is  to  inquire  who  wrote  these  things — we  loyally  be- 
lieve the  Holy  Ghost  to  be  the  author  of  the  Book.  He 
wrote  it  who  dictated  it  for  writing;  He  wrote  it  who  in- 
spired its  execution.'     [Praef.  in  Job,  n.  2.] 

**It  follows  that  those  who  maintain  that  an  error  is 
possible  in  any  genuine  passage  of  the  Sacred  Writings, 
either  pervert  the  Catholic  notion  of  inspiration,  or  make 
God  the  author  of  such  error." 

The  error  of  those  who  have  excluded  the  obiter  dicta 
from  inspiration  seems  to  be  to  regard  these  details  in  them- 
selves, without  considering  their  relations  to  the  general 
text.  Considered  apart  from  the  other  portions  of  the  book, 
they  are  unimportant :  they  could  have  been  omitted  without 
substantial  loss  to  the  book.  They  are  not  written  for 
their  own  sake ;  they  are  a  part  of  the  setting  of  more  im- 
portant truth.  The  inspired  writer  under  the  influence  of 
inspiration  conceives  his  book  in  his  hiiman  mind.  It  is 
written  in  a  human  manner  of  expression.  These  details 
are  not  irrelevant;  they  fit  in  naturally  into  the  account. 
The  motive  moving  us  to  extend  inspiration  to  them  is  not 
their  own  importance;  but  the  fact  that  if  they  be  denied 
inspiration  the  integrity  of  the  Holy  Books  is  assailed.  Who 
shall  fix  the  limits  of  the  obiter  dicta?  Hence  they  claim 
inspiration  not  on  account  of  their  own  importance  but 
because  they  are  parts  of  an  inspired  book.  Their  claim  to 
inspiration  rests  on  the  basic  truth  that  there  can  not  be 
error  in  any  part  of  the  Bible.  The  positive  teaching  of  the 
Church  condemns  the  opinion  which  asserts  that  some  parts 
of  the  Bible  are  inspired  and  others  are  not.     The  obiter 


DICTA   ALIORUM  203 

dicta  can  not  be  said  to  be  so  few  as  not  to  form  a  part  as 
here  contemplated.  The  greater  part  of  the  XVI.  Chapter 
of  Romans  is  made  up  of  salutations  which  are  set  down  as 
obiter  dicta. 

It  seems  therefore  to  follow  from  the  definitions  of  the 
Church  that  inspiration  must  be  extended  to  all  the  parts 
of  Holy  Scripture. 

In  answer  to  the  second  question,  Is  it  of  faith  that  the 
obiter  dicta  are  inspired?  we  believe  that  a  negative 
answer  must  be  returned.  Bellarmine,  however,  holds  that 
it  is  of  faith:  *'It  is  heresy,  to  believe  that  in  St.  Paul's 
Epistles  and  in  other  sacred  books  not  all  things  are  written 
at  the  dictation  of  the  Holy  Ghost;  but  that  some  things 
proceeded  solely  from  human  reason  and  judgment."  (De 
Verbo  Dei,  Lib.  i.)  Melchior  Canus  (De  Locis  Theol.  Lib. 
2,  1 6)  calls  the  theory  an  impious  error:  "How  impious 
is  the  error  to  assert  that  in  the  canonical  books  the  writers 
at  times  wrote  as  mere  men  without  the  divine  and  super- 
natural revelation  (inspiration),  I  demonstrate  first  by  the 
argument  that  in  this  opinion  the  authority  of  the  Holy 
Scriptures  is  in  great  part  shaken."  He  proceeds  then  to 
show  how  easy  it  were  to  widen  the  field  of  the  obiter  dicta ; 
and  then  concludes:  "Let  us  therefore  confess  that  every- 
thing whether  great  or  small  was  written  by  the  sacred 
writers  under  the  dictation  of  the  Holy  Ghost." 

But  the  Church  has  not  defined  the  issue  with  sufficient 
clearness  to  warrant  a  theological  censure  of  the  opposite 
opinion. 

In  relation  to  the  inspiration  of  "dicta  aliorum,"  no 
definite  rule  can  be  given.  The  character  of  the  person,  the 
circumstances  in  which  such  saying  is  uttered,  the  mode  of 
quoting,  and  the  nature  of  the  proposition  must  be  weighed. 
For  instance,  the  sayings  which  the  inspired  writers  make 
their  own  by  their  approbation  are  inspired.  St.  Peter  was 
inspired,  when  he  confessed  the  divinity  of  Christ,  not  when 
he  denied  Christ.  The  words  of  impious  men  sometimes 
are  quoted,  but  "  in  persona  illorum,"  not  intending  them 
to  be  as  truths.  In  regard  to  these,  although  no  fixed  rule 
can  be  laid  down,  still  there  is  no  difficulty  in  distinguishing 
the  true  from  the  false. 


204  DICTA    ALIORUM 

Sometimes  the  statements  are  formulated  as  the  sayings 
of  others,  but  are  in  reality  the  creations  of  the  author  him- 
self. He  sometimes  expresses  the  ideas  of  impious  men  in 
order  to  condemn  them.  Thus  in  the  book  of  Wisdom, 
speeches  are  placed  in  the  mouths  of  Epicureans  in  order  to 
illustrate  and  condemn  these  errors. 

Again,  the  inspired  writer  may  reproduce  the  words  of 
good  men  and  approve  them,  without  thereby  extending  the 
prerogative  of  absolute  infallibility  to  them.  Thus  in  Acts 
St.  Luke  relates  St.  Stephen's  great  discourse  before  the  San- 
hedrim. He  declares  also  that  Stephen  was  filled  with  the 
Holy  Ghost  in  his  discourse.  And  yet  St.  Luke  does  not 
become  responsible  for  the  lapse  of  memory  whereby  Stephen 
declares  that  Abraham  bought  the  tomb  "for  a  price  in 
silver  of  the  sons  of  Hamor  in  Shechem"  (Acts  VII.  i6). 
Genesis  (XXXIII.  18-19)  states  that  Jacob  bought  this 
tomb,  and  the  context  warrants  the  statement  of  Genesis. 

The  divine  inspiration  of  Luke  aided  him  faithfully  to 
report  Stephen's  words.  Stephen,  though  filled  with  the 
Holy  Ghost,  was  not  inspired  as  an  inspired  writer.  The 
main  truth  of  his  words  is  not  affected  by  the  accidental 
error.  St.  Luke  approves  the  substantial  truth  of  Stephen's 
words. 

Again,  it  may  happen  that  a  writer  may  present  his 
teaching  in  a  species  of  drama.  Care  must  be  taken  then 
to  discern  when  the  actors  in  the  drama  convey  the  ideas 
of  the  writer  of  the  book.  Thus  in  Job  there  are  various 
speakers  who  discuss  the  great  questions  of  human  life  and 
destiny.  With  consimimate  art  the  writer  has  so  con- 
ceived the  discourses  that,  though  there  is  an  error  of  fact 
in  Job's  friends,  inasmuch  as  they  believe  him  guilty  of  grave 
sin,  nevertheless  they  discourse  rightly  upon  the  great  issues 
of  human  life. 

If  the  inspired  writer  relates  the  words  of  others  without 
either  implicit  or  explicit  approbation,  the  words  thus  re- 
lated do  not  become  a  part  of  divinely  inspired  Scripture, 
but  have  only  their  own  intrinsic  authority.  This  principle 
will  apply  to  the  letters  written  to  the  Jews  by  the  Spartans, 
and  by  the  Romans,  and  according  to  some  to  the  letters 


DICTA   ALIORUM  205 

(II.  Maccab.  I.  15,  seqq. ;  IX.  i  seqq.)  written  by  the 
Jews  to  their  compatriots  in  Egypt.  In  a  word  therefore, 
the  sayings  of  others  related  in  Holy  Scripture  are  inspired 
if  they  become  the  sense  of  the  inspired  writer. 

Sometimes  the  writers  express  an  indetermination  of 
mind,  or  a  state  of  doubt;  or  they  express  an  estimate  of 
certain  things.  St.  Luke  seems  to  have  been  uncertain 
whether  it  were  eight  or  ten  days  that  Festus  tarried  at 
Jerusalem  (Acts  XXV.  6) ;  St.  John  describes  the  water  pots 
as  holding  two  or  three  firkins  (John  II.  6) ;  the  number  fed 
by  the  multiplication  of  the  loaves  was  not  with  mathe- 
matical precision  known  to  St,  Matthew ;  but  it  was  a  num- 
ber which  the  correct  judgment  of  men  would  estimate  at 
five  thousand.  The  truth  of  history  demands  nothing  more 
for  such  a  statement.  The  state  of  indetermination  is  not 
to  be  ascribed  to  the  Holy  Ghost.  He  uses  human  instru- 
ments to  deliver  all  truth  as  required  by  the  nature  of  the 
things  written.  It  is  an  inspired  fact  that  Festus  tarried  at 
Jerusalem  a  period  of  time  of  which  an  adequate  idea  was 
conveyed  by  declaring  that  it  was  eight  or  ten  days ;  and  so 
in  all  other  cases.  This  principle  is  very  useful  in  its  appli- 
cation to  such  biblical  facts  as  the  size  of  armies,  the  number 
of  the  slain,  etc.  We  must  distinguish  between  these  num- 
bers as  they  came  from  the  inspired  writers  and  the  present 
numbers  of  the  text.  Many  accidental  errors  have  crept 
into  the  present  numbers. 

It  is  clear  also  that  opposed  to  the  very  nature  of  in- 
spiration is  the  theory  that  the  inspired  writer  may  de- 
clare a  thing  which  is  false  in  the  sense  which  the  human 
writer  intended  to  convey;  but  true  in  the  sense  that  the 
Holy  Ghost  delivered  thereby.  God's  action  as  the  prin- 
cipal cause  of  the  writing  excludes  such  a  condition  in  the 
instrument;  for  an  essential  element  of  inspiration  is  the 
illumination  of  the  mind  of  the  inspired  writer  that  he  may 
rightly  conceive  what  he  is  to  write. 

It  would  be  the  opposite  extreme  to  hold  that  inspira- 
tion banished  all  ignorance  and  false  persuasion  from  the 
mind  of  the  inspired  writer.  As  far  as  regards  the  things 
which  they   were   not  called  to  write   as  inspired   agents 


206  VERBAL   INSPIRATION 

God  left  them  to  their  own  resources;  not,  of  course,  ex- 
cluding that  illumining  influence  that  grace  works  in  all  the 
saints.  Thus  for  instance  it  is  clearly  proclaimed  in  revela- 
tion that  the  day  of  general  judgment  is  hidden  from  all 
creatures.  This  all  the  inspired  writers  accepted  as  a  fimda- 
mental  truth.  Yet  from  their  own  human  reasoning  some 
of  them  at  least  seem  to  have  believed  that  such  event  was 
near  at  hand.  This  is  not  in  any  way  prejudicial  to  inspira- 
tion. They  do  not  proclaim  that  it  is  near  at  hand.  Per- 
haps some  of  their  arguments  relating  to  human  conduct 
in  a  certain  sense  imply  that  they  believed  that  the  con- 
summation were  not  far  off ;  but  the  arguments  do  not  assert 
it,  nor  do  they  become  false  from  the  fact  that  ages  have 
elapsed  since  they  wrote.  The  uncertainty  of  that  great 
day  is  a  true  incentive  to  a  right  order  of  life ;  and  thus  they 
used  it. 

A  most  important  and  most  difficult  question  is  to  de- 
termine what  influence  the  Holy  Ghost  has  on  the  words  o^ 
Holy  Scripture.  This  question  is  usually  treated  of  under 
the  heading  of  Verbal  inspiration.  The  term  verbal  in  this 
connection  is  badly  chosen;  for  it  admits  of  such  meanings 
that  to  the  question.  Are  the  Holy  Scriptures  verbally  in- 
spired? we  may  return  an  affirmative  and  negative  answer, 
both  true.  Hence  we  have  need  to  present  the  question  in 
clearer  terms. 

The  words  of  Holy  Scripture  may  be  divided  into  formal 
words  and  material  words.  The  formal  words  are  the  men- 
tal conceptions  of  the  writer,  and  corresponds  to  the  ideas 
expressed  in  the  books.  In  this  sense  all  the  words  of  Holy 
Scripture  are  the  words  of  God;  they  are  all  inspired;  and 
are  free  from  error. 

The  external  signs  by  which  these  ideas  are  expressed  are 
conveniently  called  material  words;  and  the  question 
is  now  to  be  discussed :  Are  these  inspired?  Here  again  we 
must  distinguish.  All  must  admit  a  certain  influence  of  the 
Holy  Ghost  on  the  words.  The  question  therefore 
narrows  itself  down  to  this.  In  what  sense  are  the  material 
words  of  Holy  Scripture  inspired? 


VERBAL   INSPIRATION  207 

We  can  readily  understand  that  the  mental  word  con- 
ceived in  the  mind  in  one  sense  compels  and  determines  the 
material  word;  and  in  another  sense  leaves  it  free.  For 
example:  the  inspired  writer  tinder  the  influence  of  divine 
inspiration  conceives  the  idea:  The  Son  of  God  became 
man.  The  nature  of  human  speech  limits  him  to  a  certain 
range  of  words  and  expressions  to  convey  that  idea.  But 
still  within  that  range  there  is  a  latitude  of  freedom.  If 
the  writer  knows  more  than  one  language  he  may  choose 
one  or  the  other.  Thus  Matthew  had  a  choice  between 
Hebrew  and  Greek  for  his  Gospel.  We  do  not  deny  that 
God  may  determine  the  tongue  to  be  used,  but  such  de- 
termination would  not  be  of  the  essence  of  inspiration. 
Again,  the  writer  may  express  the  Second  Person  of  the 
Blessed  Trinity  as  the  Son  of  God,  or  the  Word  of  God,  and 
the  same  freedom  of  choice  is  applicable  to  the  predicate. 

Let  us  take  as  another  example  the  truth :  Jesus  Christ 
died  for  us.  A  man  may  express  that  truth  in  different 
material  words,  viz..  The  Son  of  God  gave  his  life  for  us; 
The  Redeemer  suffered  death  for  all  mankind,  etc. 

Now  the  question  to  answer  is,  Did  God  in  inspiration 
determine  the  Holy  Writers  to  use  one  form  of  expression 
instead  of  another,  when  both  were  equally  apt?  Some 
of  the  early  protestants  answered  this  question  in  the  affirm- 
ative. It  was  a  part  of  that  exaggerated  sentimentalism 
which  endeavored  to  set  aside  the  Magisterium  of  the 
Church,  and  set  up  the  Scriptures  as  the  sole  rule  of  faith. 
We  have  seen  that  this  error  died  amid  its  worshippers. 
In  Catholic  thought  there  have  been  certain  changes  of 
thought  and  certain  differences  of  opinion  in  those  things 
in  which  the  Church  has  not  defined. 

The  Fathers  at  times,  speaking  oratorically,  in  their  de- 
sire to  demand  for  the  Scriptures  fitting  reverence,  speak 
in  such  terms  that  without  due  caution  one  might  be  led  to 
believe  that  they  held  the  theory  of  absolute  inspiration  of 
the  material  words.  But  a  deeper  insight  into  the  con- 
sistent principles  of  the  Fathers,  and  a  comparative  study  of 
the  system  of  their  faith  will  persuade  that  what  they  de- 
manded for  the  Holy  Scriptures  was  reverence  for  every 


208  VERBAL   INSPIRATION 

truth  of  Holy  Scripture  as  it  exists  clothed  in  fitting  words 
for  us.  Though  we  believe  that  the  inspired  writer  had 
a  certain  liberty  in  choosing  words  and  expressions,  provid- 
ing they  be  fitting,  when  he  has  made  this  choice  and  clothed 
an  inspired  idea  in  words,  these  words  become  sacred  as 
signs  of  a  divinely  inspired  idea,  and  they  will  merit  the 
veneration  which  the  Fathers  paid  them.  Moreover,  since 
the  writer's  intellectual  faculties  are  supematurally  enlight- 
ened by  the  action  of  inspiration,  this  illumination  will  in- 
fluence the  choice  of  words ;  the  inspired  writer  will  be  aided 
by  God  to  convey  his  inspired  concepts  in  a  manner  that 
befits  the  infallible  message  of  God ;  hence  our  purpose  here 
is  not  to  deny  a  certain  verbal  inspiration,  but  to  prevent  its 
exaggeration. 

The  Fathers  used  synonymously  the  two  expressions,  The 
Holy  Scriptures  are  inspired  by  God,  and.  The  Holy  Scrip- 
tures are  dictated  by  God.  Their  clear  statements  demon- 
strate that  they  did  not  use  the  term  dictation  to  signify 
the  mechanical  theory  of  inspiration.  All  will  consider 
Origen  a  capable  witness  of  tradition,  the  greatest  mind  of 
his  age.  Eusebius  (Hist.  Eccl.  VI.  25)  transmits  to  us  the 
following  testimony  of  Origen  on  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  : 

"That  the  verbal  style  of  the  epistle  entitled  'To  the 
Hebrews,'  is  not  rude  like  the  language  of  the  apostle,  who 
acknowledged  himself  'rude  in  speech,'  [II.  Cor.  XL  6]  that 
is,  in  expression ;  but  that  its  diction  is  purer  Greek,  any  one 
who  has  the  power  to  discern  differences  of  phraseology  will 
acknowledge.  Moreover,  that  the  thoughts  of  the  epistle 
are  admirable,  and  not  inferior  to  the  acknowledged 
apostolic  writings,  any  one  who  carefully  examines  the 
apostolic  text  will  admit. 

'*If  I  gave  my  opinion,  I  should  say  that  the  thoughts 
are  those  of  the  apostle,  but  the  diction  and  phraseology  are 
those  of  some  one  who  remembered  the  apostolic  teachings, 
and  wrote,  down  at  his  leisure  what  had  been  said  by  his 
teacher.  Therefore  if  any  church  holds  that  this  epistle  is 
by  Paul,  let  it  be  commended  for  this.  For  not  without 
reason  have  the  ancients  handed  it  down  as  Paul's.  But 
who  wrote  the  epistle,  in  truth,  God  knows.     The  statement 


VERBAL    INSPIRATION  209 

of  some  who  have  gone  before  us  is  that  Clement,  bishop  of 
the  Romans,  wrote  the  epistle,  and  of  others  that  Luke,  the 
author  of  the  Gospel  and  the  Acts,  wrote  it." 

We  may  logically  argue  that  if  Origen  considered  it  not 
inconsistent  with  inspiration  that  another  should  write 
down  the  inspired  writer's  thoughts  at  his  leisure  as  he  re- 
membered them,  he  was  far  from  holding  the  absolute 
inspiration  of  the  material  w^ords.  At  times  we  find  that 
under  the  prepossession  of  his  excessive  mysticism,  Origen 
extended  inspiration  to  the  very  material  letters  of  Holy 
Writ,  (Hom.  in  Ps.  I.  4)  but  he  tempered  this  extreme  view 
by  statements  such  as  we  have  adduced. 

St.  Ambrose  in  many  things  followed  the  excessive  mys- 
ticism of  Origen.  Touching  our  present  theme  he  says: 
''Though  sometimes,  according  to  the  letter,  the  Evangelists 
seem  at  variance,  the  truths  they  utter  are  not  discordant, 
for  the  mystery  is  the  same."  (On  Luke  X.  171)  Again  he 
says  (On  Luke  VIIL  63) :  "In  the  Holy  Scriptures  it  is  not 
the  order  of  words  but  the  substance  of  the  things  which  we 
should  consider." 

St.  John  Chrysostom  is  sometimes  cited  as  an  advocate 
of  inspiration  of  the  material  words  of  Holy  Scripture.  In 
his  Homily  on  Genesis,  11.  2,  he  writes  thus:  "Ye  have 
heard  just  now  the  Scripture  declaring:  'But  for  Adam 
there  was  not  found  a  help  meet  for  him.'  What  is  the 
meaning  of  the  brief  clause:  'But  for  Adam?'  Why  does 
(the  Scripture)  place  there  the  conjunction  (5e)?  Did  it 
not  suffice  to  say :  'For  Adam?'  It  is  not  from  vain  curios- 
ity that  we  discuss  these  things,  but  that  by  interpreting  all 
things  we  may  teach  you  not  to  pass  over  any  brief  saying, 
or  even  syllable  of  Holy  Scripture.  For  they  are  not  mere 
words,  but  the  words  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  therefore  a 
great  value  may  be  found  in  one  syllable."  Again  in  the 
same  work,  XXI.  i,  he  continues :  "In  the  Holy  Scriptures 
there  is  nothing  written  which  has  not  a  great  wealth  of 
meaning ;  for  since  the  prophets  spoke  by  the  inspiration  of 
the  Holy  Ghost  ,  therefore  the  writings  proceeding  from  the 
Holy  Ghost  contain  in  themselves  a  great  treasure.  There 
is  not  a  syllable  or  tittle  in  Holy  Scripture  in  whose  depths 

(14)  H.  s. 


210  VERBAL   INSPIRATION 

there  is  not  a  great  treasure."  In  his  Homily  on  ** Salute 
Priscilla  and  Aquila,"  Chrysostom  declares  the  purpose 
of  his  homily  to  be  **  that  ye  may  know  that  in  the  Holy 
Scriptures  there  is  nothing  superfluous,  even  though  it  be 
an  iota  or  a  tittle.  And  even  a  simple  salutation  opens  up 
to  us  a  vast  sea  of  meaning.  And  why  do  I  say,  a  simple 
salutation?  often  even  the  addition  of  one  letter  adds  the 
value  of  sentences.  This  may  be  seen  in  the  name  of 
Abraham.  A  man  who  receives  a  letter  from  a  friend,  not 
only  reads  the  body  of  the  letter,  but  also  the  salutation  at 
the  end,  and  concludes  from  it  the  writer's  affection;  and 
since  Paul,  or  rather  not  Paul,  but  the  grace  of  the  Holy 
Ghost,  dictates  a  letter  to  a  whole  city,  and  a  numerous 
people  and  through  them  to  the  whole  world,  is  it  not  most 
imbecoming  to  judge  that  any  thing  therein  is  superfluous 
and  pass  it  by,  not  realizing  that  thus  everything  is  per- 
verted?" 

This  is  a  strong  patristic  argument  for  the  inspiration  of 
the  obiter  dicta,  but  it  does  not  maintain  the  absolute  in- 
spiration of  the  material  words.  In  the  first  place  if  we 
press  the  testimony  too  much  it  becomes  absurd,  and  we  are 
unwilling  to  believe  that  the  mighty  mind  of  Chrysostom 
should  have  so  betrayed  him.  He  well  knew  that  the 
material  words  of  the  Old  Testament  were  not  the  material 
words  of  the  inspired  writer,  but  the  words  of  an  interpreter, 
and  as  Ambrose  rightly  says:  '*We  must  always  seek  the 
sense,  which  the  frequent  translations  from  Hebrew  into 
Greek,  and  from  Greek  into  Latin  attenuates."  (On  Ps. 
XXXVII.  49). 

Chrysostom  himself  admits  the  same  principle:  "We 
have  not  the  Old  Testament  writ  in  our  mother  tongue :  it 
was  composed  in  one  tongue ;  we  read  it  in  another.  It  was 
first  written  in  Hebrew ;  we  have  received  it  in  Greek.  By 
its  translation  into  another  tongue  it  becomes  difficult.  All 
who  are  versed  in  many  tongues  know  that  it  is  impossible 
with  equal  clearness  to  translate  everything  from  its  own 
language  into  another.  This  is  a  cause  of  difficulty  in  the 
Old  Testament."  (On  The  Obscurity  of  Proph.  11.  2.) 
Therefore  the  letters  and  tittles  of  the  Greek  text  could  not 


VERBAL    INSPIRATION  211 

have  been  considered  by  Chrysostom  as  dictated  by  the 
Holy  Ghost.  St.  Chrysostom 's  meaning  is  therefore  that 
the  deep  sense  of  Holy  Scripture  is  to  be  sought  in  every 
word  of  Holy  Scripture.  Acting  within  that  range  of  liberty 
that  we  have  explained  the  writers  chose  certain  words  and 
expressions  as  the  sensible  signs  to  convey  their  inspired 
ideas.  Therefore  the  ideas  which  might  have  been  ex- 
pressed in  other  ideas,  de  facto  lie  in  these  words.  We  may 
therefore  call  these  words  inspired;  for  by  them  as  sensible 
signs  the  conceptions  of  inspired  minds  are  delivered  to 
us.  The  words  therefore  merit  all  reverence,  and  we  can 
not  come  at  the  deep  sense  of  Holy  Scripture  without  weigh- 
ing every  word.  The  conjunction  in  Genesis  specified  by 
Chrysostom  has  a  value,  for  it  makes  more  forcible  the  con- 
trast between  the  completeness  of  the  other  orders  of  crea- 
tion, and  the  incompleteness  of  the  himian  race  as  existing 
in  Adam.  We  must  also  know  that  Chrysostom  spoke 
oratorically,  and  used  the  arts  of  oratory.  In  other  works 
he  distinguishes  between  the  inspired  sense  and  the  material 
word.  In  his  work  Contra  Judaeos  II.  XLVIII.  he  says : 
"When  thou  hearest  Paul  crying  out  and  saying:  'behold,  I 
Paul  say  to  you,  if  you  be  circumcised,  Christ  profits  you 
nothing,'  the  voice,  4>^vq,  only  recognize  to  be  that  of 
Paul,  but  the  sense  and  the  dogma  recognize  to  be  of  Christ 
by  whom  he  was  interiorly  taught." 

St.  Jerome  is  most  reverent  to  the  * 'syllables,  tittles, 
points,  etc."  of  Holy  Scripture,  since  they  "are  of  divine 
origin  and  full  of  meaning,"  (On  Eph.  V.  6).  Again  he 
declares:  "For  I  myself  not  only  admit  but  freely  pro- 
claim that  in  translating  from  the  Greek,  except  in  the  case 
of  Holy  Scriptures,  where  even  the  order  of  the  words  is  a  mys- 
tery, I  render  sense  for  sense,  and  not  word  for  word." 
(Epist.  LVII.  4.) 

A  superficial  observation  of  such  passages  might  move 
one  to  believe  that  Jerome  asserted  the  mechanical  theory 
of  verbal  inspiration;  but  deeper  study  of  his  works  demon- 
strates that  he  allowed  to  the  human  writers  the  same 
range  of  liberty  in  the  use  of  words  and  expressions  for 
which  we  are  pleading.     In  his  commentary  on  the  well 


212  VERBAL    INSPIRATION 

known  hyperbaton  of  Ephesians,  III.  i,  Jerome  declares: 
"I  believe  that  the  -expression  here  is  defective."  Jerome 
could  not  attribute  a  defective  expression  to  the  Holy  Ghost. 
Again  St.  Jerome  in  his  CXX.  Epistle,  1 1,  has  this  testimony : 
"Though  he  (Paul)  had  knowledge  of  all  the  Scriptures,  and 
knew  many  tongues,  he  was  unable  to  render  the  august 
sense  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  fittingly  in  Greek.  He  had 
therefore  Titus  as  an  interpreter,  as  Peter  had  Mark,  whose 
Gospel  was  composed  by  Peter's  dictation  and  Mark's  writ- 
ing. Moreover  the  two  epistles  which  are  called  Peter's 
differ  in  style,  character,  and  composition  of  words.  From 
which  we  know  that  by  the  necessity  of  the  case,  Peter  used 
different  amanuenses."  Jerome  will  not  be  said  to  have 
held  that  God  inspired  thoughts  to  Paul  and  Peter,  and 
words  to  different  interpreters  who  wrote  their  thoughts. 

Jerome  traces  a  man's  origin  and  education  in  his  in- 
spired writings:  "We  must  know  that  Isaiah  is  eloquent 
in  speech,  being  a  man  of  noble  birth  and  of  cultured  elo- 
quence, and  free  from  everything  imcouth."  (Prof,  on  Is.) 
"Jeremiah  the  prophet  is  held  by  the  Hebrew  to  be  ruder 
in  speech  than  Isaiah  and  Hosea  and  other  prophets,  but  he 
equals  them  in  sense,  for  he  prophesied  in  the  same  spirit. 
The  plainness  of  his  language  comes  from  the  place  of  his 
birth.  He  was  of  Anathoth,  a  village  to  this  day,  three 
miles  distant  from  Jerusalem."  (Prol.  On  Jer.)  "Amos  the 
prophet  was  of  the  shepherds,  imskilled  in  speech,  but  not 
in  knowledge;  for  the  same  Spirit  who  spoke  by  all  the 
prophets  spoke  by  him."  (Prol.  On  Amos.)  This  is  a  clear 
argument  that  the  Holy  Ghost  delivered  the  sense  of  the 
Holy  Scriptures  through  men,  leaving  to  them  to  employ 
words  and  expressions  in  conformity  with  their  education. 

A  strong  argument  against  the  theory  of  the  inspiration 
of  the  material  words  is  the  fact  that  the  inspired  writers  of 
the  New  Testament,  when  quoting  from  the  Old  Testament 
do  not  quote  the  exact  words,  but  only  the  sense.  Now 
if  the  material  words  were  inspired  by  the  Holy  Ghost, 
they  would  have  taken  care  to  reproduce  them.  Jerome 
develops  this  argument  at  great  length:  "In  Matthew 
[XXVII.  9,  ic]  when  the  thirty  pieces  of  silver  are  returned 


VERBAL   INSPIRATION  213 

by  the  traitor  Judas,  and  the  potter's  field  is  purchased  with 
them,  it  is  written: — ^'Then  was  fulfilled  that  which  was 
spoken  of  by  Jeremiah  the  prophet,  saying,  'and  they  took 
the  thirty  pieces  of  silver  the  price  of  him  that  was  valued 
which  they  of  the  children  of  Israel  did  value,  and 
gave  them  for  the  potter's  field,  as  the  Lord  appointed 
me.'  This  passage  is  not  found  in  Jeremiah  at  all 
but  in  Zechariah,  in  quite  different  words  and  an  altogether 
different  order.  In  fact  the  Vulgate  renders  it  as  follows : — 
'And  I  will  say  unto  them,  If  it  is  good  in  your  sight,  give  ye 
me  a  price  or  refuse  it.  So  they  weighed  for  my  price  thirty 
pieces  of  silver.  And  the  Lord  said  imto  me.  Put  them  into 
the  melting  furnace  and  consider  if  it  is  tried  as  I  have  been 
tried  by  them.  And  I  took  the  thirty  pieces  of  silver  and 
cast  them  into  the  house  of  the  Lord.'  [Zech.  XL  12,  13, 
Vulg.]  It  is  evident  that  the  rendering  of  the  Septuagint 
differs  widely  from  the  quotation  of  the  evangelist.  In  the 
Hebrew  also,  though  the  sense  is  the  same,  the  words  are 
quite  different  and  differently  arranged.  It  says:  'And  I 
said  unto  them.  If  ye  think  good,  give  me  my  price;  and, 
if  not,  forbear.  So  they  weighed  for  my  price  thirty  pieces 
of  silver.  And  the  Lord  said  unto  me,  Cast  it  unto  the 
potter;  [statuarius.]  a  goodly  price  that  I  was  priced  at  of 
them.  And  I  took  the  thirty  pieces  of  silver  and  cast  them 
to  the  potter  in  the  house  of  the  Lord.'  [Zech.  XI.  12,  13.] 
They  may  accuse  the  apostle  of  falsifying  his  version 
seeing  that  it  agrees  neither  with  the  Hebrew  nor  with  the 
translators  of  the  Septuagint:  and  worse  than  this,  they 
may  say  that  he  has  mistaken  the  author's  name  putting 
down  Jeremiah  when  it  should  be  Zechariah.  Far  be  it 
from  us  to  speak  thus  of  a  follower  [pedissequus.]  of  Christ, 
who  made  it  his  care  to  formulate  dogmas  rather  than  to 
hunt  for  words  and  syllables.  To  take  another  instance 
from  Zechariah,  the  evangelist  John  quotes  from  the  He- 
brew, They  shall  look  on  him  whom  they  pierced,'  [Joh. 
XIX.  37 :  Zech.  XII.  10]  for  which  we  read  in  the  Septuagint 
'And  they  shall  look  upon  me  because  they  have  mocked 
me,'  and  in  the  Latin  version,  'And  they  shall  look  upon  me 
for  the  things  which  they  have  mocked  or  insulted.'     Here 


214  VERBAL   INSPIRATION 

the  evangelist,  the  Septuagint,  and  our  own  version  [i.  e. 
the  Italic,  for  the  Vulgate,  which  was  not  then  published, 
accurately  represents  the  Hebrew.]  all  differ ;  yet  the  diverg- 
ence of  language  is  atoned  by  oneness  of  spirit.  In  Matthew 
again  we  read  of  the  Lord  preaching  flight  to  the  apostles 
and  confirming  His  counsel  with  a  passage  from  Zechariah. 
*It  is  written,'  he  says,  *I  will  smite  the  shepherd,  and  the 
sheep  of  the  flock  shall  be  scattered  abroad.'  [Matt.  XXVI, 
31 ;  Zech.  XIII.  7.]  But  in  the  Septuagint  and  in  the  He- 
brew it  reads  differently,  for  it  is  not  God  who  speaks,  as  the 
evangelist  makes  out,  but  the  prophet  who  appeals  to  God 
the  Father  saying: — 'Smite  the  shepherd,  and  the  sheep 
shall  be  scattered.'  In  this  instance  according  to  my  judg- 
ment— and  I  have  some  careful  critics  with  me — the  evan- 
gelist is  guilty  of  a  fault  in  presimiing  to  ascribe  to  God  what 
are  the  words  of  the  prophet.  Again  the  same  evangelist 
writes  that  at  the  warning  of  an  angel  Joseph  took  the  young 
child  and  his  mother  and  went  into  Egypt  and  remained 
there  till  the  death  of  Herod;  '  that  it  might  be  fulfilled 
which  was  spoken  of  the  Lord  by  the  prophet  saying,  Out  of 
Egypt  have  I  called  my  son.'  [Matt.  II.  13-15.]  The  Latin 
manuscripts  do  not  so  give  the  passage,  but  in  Hosea  [Hos. 
XI.  I.]  the  true  Hebrew  text  has  the  following: — 'When 
Israel  was  a  child  then  I  loved  him,  and  called  my  son  out  of 
Egypt.'  Which  the  Septuagint  renders  thus: — 'When 
Israel  was  a  child  then  I  loved  him,  and  called  his  sons  out  of 
Egypt .  'Are  they  [t.  e. ,  the  Septuagint  and  Vulgate  versions] 
altogether  to  be  rejected  because  they  have  given 
another  turn  to  a  passage  which  refers  primarily  to  the  mys- 
tery of  Christ?  .  .  .  Once  more  it  is  written  in  the 
pages  of  the  same  evangelist,  'And  he  came  and  dwelt  in  a 
city  called  Nazareth:  that  it  might  be  fulfilled  which  was 
spoken  by  the  prophets,  He  shall  be  called  a  Nazarene.' 
[Matt.  II.  23.]  Let  those  word  fanciers  and  nice  critics  of 
all  composition  tell  us  where  they  have  read  the  words ;  and 
if  they  cannot,  let  me  tell  them  that  they  are  in  Isaiah. 
[Isa.  XL  I.]  For  in  the  place  where  we  read  and  translate, 
'There  shall  come  forth  a  rod  out  of  the  stem  of  Jesse,  and 
a  branch  shall  grow  out  of  his  roots,'    [So  AV. ;  the  Vulg. 


VERBAL   INSPIRATION  215 

varies  slightly.]  in  the  Hebrew  idiom  it  is  written  thus, 
"There  shall  come  forth  a  rod  out  of  the  root  of  Jesse,  and 
a  Nazarene  shall  grow  from  his  root.'  How  can  the  Septua- 
gint  leave  out  the  word  'Nazarene,'  if  it  is  unlawful  to 
substitute  one  word  for  another?  It  is  sacrilege  either  to 
conceal  or  to  set  at  naught  a  mystery. 

''Let  us  pass  on  to  other  passages,  for  the  brief  limits  of 
a  letter  do  not  suffer  us  to  dwell  too  long  on  any  one  point. 
The  same  Matthew  says: — 'Now  all  this  was  done  that  it 
might  be  fulfilled  which  was  spoken  of  the  Lord  by  the 
prophet  saying,  Behold  a  virgin  shall  be  with  child  and  shall 
bring  forth  a  son  and  they  shall  call  his  name  Emmanuel.* 
[Matt.  I.  22,  23;  Isa.  Vn.  14.]  The  rendering  of  the  Sep- 
tuagint  is,  'Behold  a  virgin  shall  receive  seed  and  shall  bring 
forth  a  son,  and  ye  shall  call  his  name  Emmanuel.'  If  peo- 
ple cavil  at  words,  obviously  'to  receive  seed'  is  not  the  exact 
equivalent  of  'to  be  with  child,'  and  'ye  shall  call'  differs 
from  'they  shall  call.'  Moreover  in  the  Hebrew  we  read 
thus,  'Behold  a  virgin  shall  conceive  and  bear  a  son  and 
shall  call  his  name  Immanuel.'  [AV.]  Ahaz  shall  not  call 
him  so,  for  he  was  convicted  of  want  of  faith,  nor  the  Jews, 
for  they  were  destined  to  deny  him,  but  she  who  is  to  con- 
ceive him,  and  bear  him,  the  virgin  herself.  In  the  same 
evangelist  we  read  that  Herod  was  troubled  at  the  coming 
of  the  Magi,  and  that  gathering  together  the  scribes  and  the 
priests  he  demanded  of  them  where  Christ  should  be  born, 
and  that  they  answered  him,  'In  Bethlehem  of  Judah :  for 
thus  it  is  written  by  the  prophet;  and  thou  Bethlehem  in 
the  land  of  Judah  art  not  the  least  among  the  princes  of 
Judah,  for  out  of  thee  shall  come  a  governor  that  shall  rule 
my  people  Israel.'  [Matt.  II.  5.,  6.]  In  the  Vulgate  [i.  e. 
the  Versio  Itala  which  was  vulgata  or  'commonly  used  at 
this  time,  as  Jerome's  Version  was  afterwards]  this  passage 
appears  as  follows: — 'And  thou  Bethlehem,  the  house  of 
Ephratah,  art  small  to  be  among  the  thousands  of  Judah, 
yet  one  shall  come  out  of  thee  for  me  to  be  a  prince  in  Israel.' 
You  will  be  m.ore  surprised  still  at  the  difference  in  words 
and  order  between  Matthew  and  the  Septuagint  if  you  look 
at  the  Hebrew  which  runs  thus: — 'But  thou  Bethlehem 


216  VERBAL   INSPIRATION 

Ephratah,  though  thou  be  Httle  among  the  thousands  of 
Judah,  yet  out  of  thee  shall  he  come  forth  unto  me  that  is  to 
be  ruler  in  Israel.'  [Mic.  V.  2.]  Consider  one  by  one  the 
words  of  the  evangelist : — 'And  thou  Bethlehem  in  the  land 
of  Judah.'  For  the  land  of  Judah  the  Hebrew  has  'Eph- 
ratah' while  the  Septuagint  gives  'the  house  of  Ephratah.' 
The  evangelist  writes,  'art  not  the  least  among  the  princes  of 
Judah.'  In  the  Septuagint  this  is,  'art  small  to  be  among 
the  thousands  of  Judah,'  while  the  Hebrew  gives,  'though 
thou  be  little  among  the  thousands  of  Judah.'  There  is  a 
contradiction  here — and  that  not  merely  verbal  — between 
the  evangelist  and  the  prophet ;  for  in  this  place  at  any  rate 
both  Septuagint  and  Hebrew  agree.  The  evangelist  says 
that  he  is  not  little  among  the  princes  of  Judah,  while  the 
passage  from  which  he  quotes  says  exactly  the  opposite  of 
this,  'Thou  are  small  indeed  and  little;  but  yet  out  of  thee, 
small  and  little  as  thou  art,  there  shall  come  forth  for  me  a 
leader  in  Israel,'  a  sentiment  in  harmony  with  that  of  the 
apostle,  'God  hath  chosen  the  weak  things  of  the  world  to 
confound  the  things  that  are  mighty.'  [I.  Cor.  I.  27.]  More- 
over the  last  clause  'to  rule'  or  'to  feed  my  people  Israel' 
clearly  nms  differently  in  the  original. 

"I  refer  to  these  passages,  not  to  convict  the  evangelists 
of  falsification — a  charge  worthy  only  of  impious  men  like 
Celsus,  Porphyry,  and  Julian — but  to  bring  home  to  my 
critics  their  own  want  of  knowledge,  and  to  gain  from  them 
such  consideration  that  they  may  concede  to  me  in  the  case 
of  a  simple  letter  what,  whether  they  like  it  or  not,  they  will 
have  to  concede  to  the  Apostles  in  the  Holy  Scriptures. 
Mark,  the  disciple  of  Peter,  begins  his  gospel  thus: — 'The 
beginning  of  the  gospel  of  Jesus  Christ,  as  it  is  written  in 
the  prophet  Isaiah:  Behold  I  send  my  messenger  before 
thy  face  who  shall  prepare  thy  way  before  thee.  The 
voice  of  one  crying  in  the  wilderness,  Prepare  ye  the  way  of 
the  Lord,  make  his  paths  straight.'  [Mark  I.  1-3.] 
This  quotation  is  made  up  from  two  prophets,  Malachi,  that 
is  to  say,  and  Isaiah.  For  the  first  part :  'Behold  I  send  my 
messenger  before  thy  face  who  shall  prepare  thy  way  be- 
fore thee,'  occurs  at  the  close  of   Malachi.     [Mai.  III.   i] 


VERBAL    INSPIRATION  217 

But  the  second  part:  The  voice  of  one  crying,  etc.,'  we  read 
in  Isaiah.  [Isa.  XL.  3.]  On  what  grounds  then  has  Mark 
in  the  very  beginning  of  his  book  set  the  words :  *As  it  is 
written  in  the  prophet  Isaiah,  Behold  I  send  my  messenger, ' 
when,  as  we  have  said,  it  is  not  written  in  Isaiah  at  all,  but 
in  Malachi  the  last  of  the  twelve  prophets?  Let  ignorant 
presumption  solve  this  nice  question  if  it  can,  and  I  will  ask 
pardon  for  being  in  the  wrong.  The  same  Mark  brings  be- 
fore us  the  Saviour  thus  addressing  the  Pharisees:  'Have 
ye  never  read  what  David  did  when  he  had  need  and  was 
hungry,  he  and  they  that  were  with  him,  how  he  went  into 
the  house  of  God  in  the  days  of  Abiathar  the  highpriest, 
and  did  eat  the  shewbread  which  is  not  lawful  to  eat  but 
for  the  priests?'  [Mark  II.  25,  26.]  Now  let  us  turn  to  the 
books  of  Samuel,  or,  as  they  are  commonly  called,  of  Kings, 
and  we  shall  find  there  that  the  highpriest 's  name  was  not 
Abiathar  but  Ahimelech,  [I.  Sam.  XXI.  i.]  the  same  that 
was  afterwards  put  to  death  with  the  rest  of  the  priests 
by  Doeg  at  the  command  of  Saul.  [I.  Sam.  XXII.  16-18.] 
Let  us  pass  on  now  to  the  apostle  Paul  who  writes  thus  to 
the  Corinthians:  Tor  had  they  known  it,  they  would  not 
have  crucified  the  Lord  of  glory.  But,  as  it  is  written. 
Eye  hath  not  seen  nor  ear  heard,  neither  have  entered  into 
the  heart  of  man,  the  things  which  God  hath  prepared  for 
them  that  love  Him.'  [I.  Cor.  II.  8,  9.]  Some  writers  on  this 
passage  betake  themselves  to  the  ravings  of  the  apocryphal 
books,  and  assert  that  the  quotation  comes  from  the  Revela- 
tion of  Eliah ;  [This  book  is  no  longer  extant.  It  belonged 
to  the  same  class  as  the  Book  of  Enoch.]  whereas  the  truth 
is  that  it  is  found  in  Isaiah  according  to  the  Hebrew  text : 
'Since  the  beginning  of  the  world  men  have  not  heard  nor 
perceived  by  the  ear,  neither  hath  the  eye  seen,  O  God,  be- 
side thee  what  thou  hast  prepared  for  them  that  wait  for 
thee.'  [Isa.  LXIV.  4,  LXX.  AV.  has  'what  he  hath  pre- 
pared for  him  that  waiteth  for  him.']  The  Septuagint  has 
rendered  the  words  quite  differently :  'Since  the  beginning 
of  the  world  we  have  not  heard,  neither  have  our  eyes  seen 
any  God  beside  thee  and  thy  true  works,  and  thou  wilt  shew 
mercy  to  them  that  wait  for  thee.'     We  see  then  from  what 


218  VERBAL   INSPIRATION 

place  the  quotation  is  taken  and  yet  the  apostle  has  not 
rendered  his  original  word  for  word,  but,  using  a  paraphrase, 
he  has  given  the  sense  in  different  terms.  In  his  epistle  to 
the  Romans  the  same  apostle  quotes  these  words  from 
Isaiah:  'Behold  I  lay  in  Sion  a  stumbling  stone  and  rock 
of  offence,'  [Rom.  IX.  33.]  a  rendering  which  is  at  variance 
with  the  Greek  version  [Lit.  with  the  old  version.]  yet 
agrees  with  the  original  Hebrew.  The  Septuagint  gives  an 
opposite  meaning,  'that  you  fall  not  on  a  stumblingstone 
nor  on  a  rock  of  offence.'  The  apostle  Peter  agrees  with 
Paul  and  the  Hebrew,  writing:  'but  to  them  that  do  not 
believe,  a  stone  of  stumbling  and  a  rock  of  offence.'  [I  Pet. 
II.  8;  AV.  is  different.]  From  all  these  passages  it  is  clear 
that  the  apostles  and  evangelists  in  translating  the  old  testa- 
ment scriptures  have  sought  to  give  the  meaning  rather  than 
the  words,  and  that  they  have  not  greatly  cared  to  preserve 
forms  or  constructions,  so  long  as  thy  could  make  clear  the 
subject  to  the  tmderstanding. 

"Luke  the  evangelist  and  companion  of  apostles  describes 
Christ's  first  martyr  Stephen  as  relating  what  follows  in  a 
Jewish  assembly.  'With  threescore  and  fifteen  souls  Jacob 
went  down  into  Egypt,  and  died  himself,  and  our  fathers 
were  carried  over  [So  the  Vulg. :  AV.  punctuates  differently.] 
into  Sychem,  and  laid  in  the  sepulchre  that  Abraham  bought 
for  a  sum  of  money  of  the  sons  of  Emmor  [i.  e.  Hamor] 
the  father  of  Sychem.'  [Acts  VII.  15,  16.]  In  Genesis 
this  passage  is  quite  differently  given,  for  it  is  Abraham 
that  buys  of  Ephron  the  Hittite,  the  son  of  Zohar,  near 
Hebron,  for  four  hundred  shekels  [Drachmae.]  of  silver,  a 
double  cave,  [Spelunca  duplex.]  and  the  field  that  is  about 
it,  and  that  buries  in  it  Sarah  his  wife.  And  in  the  same 
book  we  read  that,  after  his  return  from  Mesopotamia  with 
his  wives  and  his  sons,  Jacob  pitched  his  tent  before  Salem 
a  city  of  Shechem  which  is  in  the  land  of  Canaan,  and  that 
he  dwelt  there  and  'bought  a  parcel  of  a  field  where  he  had 
spread  his  tent  at  the  hand  of  Hamor,  the  father  of  Sychem, 
for  an  himdred  lambs'  [AV.  marg.],  and  that  'he  erected 
there  an  altar  and  called  there  upon  the  God  of  Israel.' 
[Gen.  XXXIII.  18-20;  AV.  varies  slightly.]  Abraham  does 


VERBAL   INSPIRATION  219 

not  buy  the  cave  from  Hamor  the  father  of  Sychem,  but 
from  Ephron  the  son  of  Zohar,  and  he  is  not  buried  in  Sychem 
but  in  Hebron  which  is  corruptly  called  Arboch.  Whereas 
the  twelve  patriarchs  are  not  buried  in  Arboch  but  in  Sychem 
in  the  field  purchased  not  by  Abraham  but  by  Jacob.  I 
postpone  the  solution  of  this  delicate  problem  to  enable 
those  who  cavil  at  me  to  search  and  see  that  in  dealing  with 
the  scriptures  it  is  the  sense  we  have  to  look  to  and  not  the 
words." 

None  of  the  Fathers  treated  the  question  of  verbal  in- 
spiration with  the  clearness  and  depth  of  Augustine.  He 
distinguishes  between  sense  and  material  word,  and  de- 
clares that  in  employing  the  material  word,  the  writers 
use  that  liberty  that  we  here  demand  for  them.  A  good 
specimen  of  St.  Augustine's  principles  concerning  this  ques- 
tion is  found  in  his  ''Harmony  of  the  Evangelists,"  Bk.  H., 
27-29: 

"If  now  the  question  is  asked,  as  to  which  of  the  words 
we  are  to  suppose  the  most  likely  to  have  been  the  precise 
words  used  by  John  the  Baptist,  whether  those  recorded  as 
spoken  by  him  in  Matthew's  Gospel,  or  those  in  Luke's,  or 
those  which  Mark  has  introduced,  among  the  few  sentences 
which  he  mentions  to  have  been  uttered  by  him,  while  he 
omits  notice  of  all  the  rest,  it  will  not  be  deemed  wor1±i  while 
creating  any  difficulty  for  oneself  in  a  matter  of  that  kind, 
by  any  one  who  wisely  understands  that  the  real  requisite  in 
order  to  get  at  the  knowledge  of  the  truth  is  just  to  make 
sure  of  the  things  really  meant,  whatever  may  be  the  pre- 
cise words  in  which  they  happen  to  be  expressed.  For 
although  one  writer  may  retain  a  certain  order  in  the  words, 
and  another  present  a  different  one,  there  is  surely  no  real 
contradiction  in  that.  Nor,  again,  need  there  be  any  an- 
tagonism between  the  two,  although  one  m'ay  state  what 
another  omits.  For  it  is  evident  that  the  evangelists  have 
set  forth  these  matters  just  in  accordance  with  the  recollec- 
tion each  retained  of  them,  and  just  according  as  their 
several  predilections  prompted  them  to  employ  greater  brev- 
ity or  richer  detail  on  certain  points,  while  giving,  never- 
theless, the  same  account  of  the  subjects  themselves. 


220  VERBAL   INSPIRATION 

"Thus,  too,  in  what  more  pertinently  concerns  the  mat- 
ter in  hand,  it  is  sufficiently  obvious  that,  since  the  truth  of 
the  Gospel,  conveyed  in  that  word  of  God  which  abides 
eternal  and  unchangeable  above  all  that  is  created,  but 
which  at  the  same  time  has  been  disseminated  through- 
out the  world  by  the  instnmientality  of  temporal  symbols, 
and  by  the  tongues  of  men,  has  possessed  itself  of  the  most 
exalted  height  of  authority,  we  ought  not  to  suppose  that 
any  one  of  the  writers  is  giving  an  unreliable  account,  if, 
when  several  persons  are  recalling  some  matter  either  heard 
or  seen  by  them,  they  fail  to  follow  the  very  same  plan,  or  to 
use  the  very  same  words,  while  describing,  nevertheless,  the 
self -same  fact.  Neither  should  we  indulge  such  a  supposi- 
tion, although  the  order  of  the  words  may  be  varied;  or 
although  some  words  may  be  substituted  in  place  of  others, 
which  nevertheless  have  the  same  meaning;  or  although 
something  may  be  left  imsaid,  either  because  it  has  not 
occurred  to  the  mind  of  the  recorder,  or  because  it  becomes 
readily  intelligible  from  other  statements  which  are  giveri; 
or  although,  among  other  matters  which  (may  not  beaf^' 
directly  on  his  immediate  purpose,  but  which)  he  decides 
on  mentioning  rather  for  the  sake  of  the  narrative,  and  in 
order  to  preserve  the  proper  order  of  time,  one  of  them  may 
introduce  something  which  he  does  not  feel  called  upon  to 
expound  as  a  whole  at  length,  but  only  to  touch  upon  in 
part ;  or  although,  with  the  view  of  illustrating  his  meaning, 
and  making  it  thoroughly  clear,  the  person  to  whom  author- 
ity is  given  to  compose  the  narrative  makes  some  additions 
of  his  own,  not  indeed  in  the  subject-matter  itself,  but  in 
the  words  by  which  it  is  expressed;  or  although,  while  re- 
taining a  perfectly  reliable  comprehension  of  the  fact  itself, 
he  may  not  be  entirely  successful,  however  he  may  make 
that  his  aim,  in  calling  to  mind  and  reciting  anew  with  the 
most  literal  accuracy  the  very  words  which  he  heard  on  the 
occasion.  Moreover,  if  any  one  affirms  that  the  evangelists 
ought  certainly  to  have  had  that  kind  of  capacity  imparted 
to  them  by  the  power  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  which  would  secure 
them  against  all  variation  the  one  from  the  other,  either  in 
the  kind  of  words,  or  in  their  order,  or  in  their  number,  that 


VERBAL   INSPIRATION  221 

person  fails  to  perceive,  that  just  in  proportion  as  the  author- 
ity of  the  evangeHsts  [under  their  existing  conditions]  is 
made  pre-eminent,  the  credit  of  all  other  men  who  offer  true 
statements  of  events  ought  to  have  been  established  on  a 
stronger  basis  by  their  instrumentality :  so  that  when  several 
parties  happen  to  narrate  the  same  circumstance,  none  of 
them  can  by  any  means  be  rightly  charged  with  untruth- 
fulness if  he  differs  from  the  other  only  in  such  a  way  as  can 
be  defended  on  the  ground  of  the  antecedent  example  of  the 
evangelists  themselves.  For  as  we  are  not  at  liberty  either 
to  suppose  or  to  say  that  any  one  of  the  evangelists  has 
stated  what  is  false,  so  it  will  be  apparent  that  any  other 
writer  is  as  little  chargeable  with  untruth,  with  whom,  in  the 
process  of  recalling  anything  for  narration,  it  has  fared  only 
in  a  way  similar  to  that  in  which  it  is  shown  to  have  fared 
with  those  evangelists.  And  thus  as  it  belongs  to  the  high- 
est morality  to  guard  against  all  that  is  false,  so  ought  we  all 
the  more  to  be  ruled  by  an  authority  so  eminent,  to  the 
effect  that  we  should  not  suppose  ourselves  to  come  upon 
what  must  be  false,  when  we  find  the  narratives  of  any  writ- 
ers differ  from  each  other  in  the  manner  in  which  the  records 
of  the  evangelists  are  proved  to  contain  variations.  At  the 
same  time,  in  what  most  seriously  concerns  the  faithfulness 
of  doctrinal  teaching,  we  should  also  imderstand  that  it  is 
not  so  much  truth  in  mere  words  as  rather  truth  in  the  facts 
themselves,  that  is  to  be  sought  and  embraced ;  for  as  to 
writers  who  do  not  employ  precisely  the  same  modes  of 
statement,  if  they  only  do  not  present  discrepancies  with 
respect  to  the  facts  and  the  sentiments  themselves,  we  ac- 
cept them  as  holding  the  same  position  in  veracity. 

**With  respect,  then,  to  those  comparisons  which  I  have 
instituted  between  the  several  narratives  of  the  evangelists, 
what  do  these  present  that  must  be  considered  to  be  of  a 
contradictory  order?  Are  we  to  regard  in  this  light  the 
circumstance  that  one  of  them  has  given  us  the  words, 
whose  shoes  I  am  not  worthy  to  bear,  whereas  the  others  speak 
of  the  unloosing  of  the  latchet  of  the  shoe?  For  here,  indeed, 
the  difference  seems  to  be  neither  in  the  mere  words,  nor  in 
the  order  of  the  words,  nor  in  any  matter  of  simple  phrase- 


222  VERBAL   INSPIRATION 

ology,  but  in  the  actual  matter  of  fact,  when  in  one  case 
the  bearing  of  the  shoe  is  mentioned  and  in  the  other  the 
unloosing  of  the  shoe's  latchet.  Quite  fairly,  therefore,  may 
the  question  be  put,  as  to  what  it  was  that  John  declared 
himself  unworthy  to  do — whether  to  bear  the  shoes,  or  to 
unloose  the  shoe's  latchet.  For  if  only  the  one  of  these  two 
sentences  was  uttered  by  him,  then  that  evangelist  will 
appear  to  have  given  the  correct  narrative  who  was  in  a 
position  to  record  what  was  said ;  while  the  writer  who  has 
given  the  saying  in  another  form,  although  he  may  not 
indeed  have  offered  an  [intentionally]  false  account  of  it, 
may  at  any  rate  be  taken  to  have  made  a  slip  of  memory, 
and  will  be  reckoned  thus  to  have  stated  one  thing  instead 
of  another.  It  is  only  seemly,  however,  that  no  charge  of 
absolute  un veracity  should  be  laid  against  the  evangelists, 
and  that,  too,  not  only  with  regard  to  that  kind  of  unver- 
acity  which  comes  by  the  positive  telling  of  what  is  false,  but 
also  with  regard  to  that  which  arises  through  forgetfulness. 
Therefore,  if  it  is  pertinent  to  the  matter  to  deduce  one  sense 
from  the  words  to  hear  the  shoes,  and  another  sense  from  the 
words  to  unloose  the  shoe's  latchet,  what  should  one  suppose 
the  correct  interpretation  to  be  put  on  the  facts,  but  that 
John  did  give  utterance  to  both  these  sentences,  either  on 
two  different  occasions  or  in  one  and  the  same  connection? 
For  he  might  very  well  have  expressed  himself  thus,  whose 
shoe's  latchet  I  am  not  worthy  to  unloose,  and  whose  shoes  I 
am  not  worthy  to  hear:  and  then  one  of  the  evangelists  may 
have  reproduced  the  one  portion  of  the  saying,  and  the  rest 
of  them  the  other ;  while,  notwithstanding  this,  all  of  them 
have  really  given  a  veracious  narrative.  But  further,  if, 
when  he  spoke  of  the  shoes  of  the  Lord,  John  meant  nothing 
more  than  to  convey  the  idea  of  His  supremacy  and  his  own 
lowliness,  then,  whichever  of  the  two  sayings  may  have 
actually  been  uttered  by  him,  whether  that  regarding  the 
unloosing  of  the  latchet  of  the  shoes,  or  that  respecting  the 
bearing  of  the  shoes,  the  self -same  sense  is  still  correctly 
preserved  by  any  writer  who,  while  making  mention  of  the 
shoes  in  words  of  his  own,  has  expressed  at  the  same  time 
the  same  idea  of  lowliness,  and  thus  has  not  made  an}^  de- 


VERBAL   INSPIRATION  223 

parture  from  the  real  mind  [of  the  person  of  whom  he  writes]. 
It  is  therefore  a  useful  principle,  and  one  particularly  worthy 
of  being  borne  in  mind,  when  we  are  speaking  of  the  con- 
cord of  the  evangelists,  that  there  is  no  divergence  [to  be 
supposed]  from  truth,  even  when  they  introduce  some  say- 
ing different  from  what  was  actually  uttered  by  the  person 
concerning  whom  the  narrative  is  given,  provided  that, 
notwithstanding  this,  they  set  forth  as  his  mind  precisely 
what  is  also  so  conveyed  by  that  one  among  them  who  re- 
produces the  words  as  they  were  literally  spoken.  For  thus 
we  learn  the  salutary  lesson,  that  our  aim  should  be  nothing 
else  than  to  ascertain  what  is  the  mind  and  intention  of  the 
person  who  speaks." 

In  view  of  this  clear  testimony,  it  is  strange  that  Pere 
Lagrange  hesitates  not  to  say:  ''That  we  maintain,  with 
the  Fathers,  that  inspiration  extends  itself  to  everything, 
even  to  the  words,  is  precisely  to  the  end  to  establish  that 
the  term  inspiration  is  not  synonymous  with  the  dictation" 
(Revue  Biblique,  1904,  p.  293).  While  such  reckless  disre- 
gard of  historical  facts  and  such  party  spirit  prevail  in 
those  who  demand  a  more  liberal  exegesis,  there  is  no  hope 
of  effecting  a  harmony  among  Catholic  scholars.  Far  more 
truthful  is  the  doctrine  which  Venerable  Bede  drew  from 
the  Fathers,  that  the  prophets  ''secretly  were  taught  the 
mysteries  by  clear  mental  visions,  that  they  might  make 
these  things  known  to  their  hearers  by  whatever  words 
they  pleased".     (On  II.  Peter  i.) 

Most  of  the  older  scholastic  writers  did  not  expressly 
treat  the  question  of  verbal  inspiration.  St.  Thomas  leaves 
men  in  doubt  as  to  his  view.  However,  in  his  prologue  to 
Hebrews,  he  declares  that  in  this  epistle  Paul  "is  more 
elegant  in  style,  because  although  he  knew  all  tongues  (I.  Cor. 
XIV.  18)  nevertheless,  he  knew  better  the  Hebrew  as  his 
mother  tongue  in  which  he  wrote  this  epistle.  And  there- 
fore he  could  speak  more  eloquently  in  that  tongue  than  in 
another.  .  .  .  Luke,  a  most  excellent  interpreter,  trans- 
ferred that  eloquence  from  Hebrew  into  Greek."  This 
certainly  admits  the  himian  element  in  the  words  of  Scrip- 
ture for  which  we  are  contending. 


224  VERBAL    INSPIRATION 

Henry  of  Ghent,  a  disciple  of  Albertus  Magnus,  asserted 
verbal  inspiration,  but  no  other  writer  of  authority  is 
found  of  that  opinion  among  the  older  scholastics. 

After  the  Council  of  Trent  opinion  was  divided  on  the 
question.  Towards  the  end  of  the  XVII I.  Century,  the 
opinion  denying  verbal  inspiration  in  the  material  sense 
became  the  common  opinion.  Marchini  (ti773)  expresses 
the  common  opinion  of  his  day  as  follows:  "The  divine 
afflatus  and  inspiration  can  have  place  even  though  God  by 
special  action  furnishes  neither  words  nor  sentences.  Truly 
if  the  Holy  Ghost  is  present  to  the  writer  whom  he  has  moved 
to  write ;  if,  in  case  memory  should  fail  the  writer,  (the  Holy 
Ghost)  opportunely  suggests  what  he  wishes  written ;  if  he 
enlightens  the  mind  with  a  light  that  dispels  all  ignorance 
and  lack  of  judgment ;  if  he  strengthens  the  mind  with  such 
power  that  all  things  are  written  faithfully,  plainly  and 
consistently;  if  he  brings  to  the  mind  hidden,  sublime,  and 
unknown  things ;  if  he  leaves  no  part  of  Script-ure  devoid  of 
his  care,  verily  the  books  will  be  written  by  the  inspiration 
of  God,  although  the  speech,  and  the  expressions  proceed 
for  the  most  part  from  the  genius,  memory,  study,  medita- 
tion, and  diligence  of  man."    (De  Div.  et  Can.  Sac.  Lib.) 

The  sense  and  the  words  are  the  effect  of  a  man  writing 
under  the  influence  of  divine  inspiration,  and  in  that  sense 
the  words  are  influenced  by  divine  inspiration;  but  this 
influence  leaves  to  the  writer  more  of  the  human  element  in 
the  words  than  in  the  sense ;  for  the  sense  is  the  direct  object 
of  God's  action :  the  words  are  intended  only  as  a  means  of 
conveying  the  sense.  God  as  the  principal  author  can  not 
be  indifferent  as  to  the  sense  of  any  part  of  Holy  Scripture, 
for  the  sense  of  every  part  is  attributable  to  Him.  He  may 
and  does  permit  a  liberty  of  choice  of  words  to  convey  this 
sense,  provided  they  be  an  apt  medium  to  express  his  mind. 
God  inspired  writers  in  order  that  they  should  write  deter- 
minate truths,  not  determinate  words ;  he  inspired  them  to 
write  his  message  in  fitting  words  which  their  faculties 
furnished. 

There  are  times  when  the  Holy  Ghost  determines  the 
material  words,  but  this  pertains  not  to  the   essence  of 


VERBAL  INSPIRATION  225 

inspiration,  and  more  rarely  is  verified.  Again  when  God 
gives  command  to  "speak  the  words"  of  God,  or  to  "write 
the  words  of  God  "  it  is  evident  that  the  meaning  is  to  deliver 
to  men  the  formal  words  of  God,  not  the  material  words. 

A  legitimate  argument  against  the  inspiration  of  the 
material  words  of  Scripture  may  be  drawn  from  the  follow- 
ing consideration.  In  God's  plan  entities  are  not  to  be 
multiplied  without  necessity.  God  employs  the  ordinary 
course  of  created  agents  where  their  causality  is  adequate 
to  attain  the  end.  Now  there  is  no  reason  why  God  should 
have  exercised  a  special  action  in  determining  words  and 
expressions  for  the  inspired  writers.  That  God  could  have 
thus  acted  on  the  inspired  writers,  all  admit.  It  may  be 
that  he  did  determine  the  very  material  words  in  some 
instances;  but  the  evidence  is  against  admitting  that  such 
determination  pertains  to  the  essence  of  inspiration.  Many 
of  the  arguments  against  verbal  inspiration  have  already 
been  adduced.  An  additional  argument  may  be  drawn 
from  the  manner  in  which  the  inspired  writers  record  facts. 

In  the  Scriptures,  sometimes  the  same  fact  is  related  by 
different  writers  in  different  ways.  For  instance,  the  con- 
secration of  the  chalice  is  related  in  four  different  ways  by 
St.  Matt.,  XXVI.,  28;  St.  Mark,  XIV.,  24;  St.  Luke,  XXII., 
20,  and  St.  Paul,  I.  Cor.  XI.,  25.  These  speak  of  the  same 
words  of  Christ,  as  He  used  them  once  for  all  at  the  Last 
Supper.  If  the  Holy  Ghost  had  inspired  the  words,  how 
could  we  account  for  these  divergencies?  Here  applies 
aptly  what  St.  Augustine  said  of  the  inspired  writers:  " Ut 
quisque  meminerat  eos  explicasse  manifestum  est. " 

We  may  add  that  certainly  the  determination  of  the 
material  words  can  not  enter  into  the  essence  of  the  message 
of  God,  for  such  message  was  destined  for  the  whole  world, 
which  it  did  not  reach,  and  could  not  reach  in  the  original 
words  in  which  it  was  first  delivered. 

It  may  be  said  that  the  same  argument  evinces  the  same 
latitude  for  the  things  of  Scripture  that  pertain  not  to  faith 
and  morals.  In  the  versions  accidental  errors  have  crept 
into  these  in  more  or  less  degree ;  therefore,  why  demand  a 
more  absolute  standard  of  inerrancy  in  the  original?     To 


226  VERBAL   INSPIRATION 

answer  this  difficulty  we  must  know  that  the  conditions  of 
the  sense  of  Holy  Scripture  differ  from  the  conditions  of  the 
words.  It  is  defined  by  the  Church  that  God  is  the  Author 
of  the  entire  Scriptures  with  all  their  parts,  for  the  reason 
that  they  were  written  by  men  inspired  by  the  Holy  Ghost. 
This  definition  extends  inspiration  to  every  enunciation  of 
Holy  Scripture,  and  the  definition  goes  farther,  and  declares 
that  the  whole  Scriptures  thus  inspired  contain  no  error. 
Now  if  we  exempt  certain  passages  of  Holy  Writ  from 
this  infallible  inspiration,  we  sever  the  vital  unity  of  the 
Scriptures,  we  practise  vivisection  in  the  strict  sense.  A 
proposition  may  be  enunciated  in  different  words,  and 
still  preserv^e  its  identity  of  sense;  but  a  sentence  can  not 
be  true  and  false  at  the  same  time.  When  we  say  that 
inspired  w^riters  wrote  the  message  of  God  with  infallible 
truth,  but  with  words  which  they  themselves  determined 
within  the  range  of  fitting  words,  we  leave  to  God  his  right- 
ful character  as  Inspirer  and  Author  of  the  Scriptures ;  but 
when  we  say  that  the  inspired  writers  wrote  partly  true 
things  and  partly  false,  we  can  not  make  God  the  Author  of 
such  a  medley  of  truth  and  falsehood.  The  divine  action  of 
inspiration  enlightens  the  mind  of  the  writer  to  conceive 
ideas  of  the  truths  he  is  to  deliver.  These  concepts  must  be 
true.  Truth  is  one.  But  without  detriment  to  their  truth 
these  concepts  may  in  general  be  expressed  by  different 
words.  They  demand  apt  words,  but  not  determinate 
forms  of  expression;  and  here  we  place  the  liberty  of  the 
inspired  writer.  When  Abraham  goes  down  with  his  wife 
Sarah  into  Egypt,  and  she  is  taken  from  him  into  the  house 
of  Pharaoh,  there  is  but  one  concept  that  corresponds  to  it. 
It  may  be  expressed  in  different  words,  but  the  event  has 
an  individual  unity,  and  there  can  be  but  one  true  idea  of  it. 
Therefore  when  the  writer  records  that  event,  he  must 
reproduce  that  determinate  fact.  Therefore  when  we  find 
such  historical  statements  in  the  Bible  we  must  conclude 
that  they  are  historically  true.  They  cannot  be  allegories, 
or  parables:  all  the  characteristics  of  allegory  and  parable 
are  absent.  They  form  a  part  of  a  real  history;  their 
context  shows  that  the  writers  meant  them  as  real  history. 


VERBAL   INSPIRATION  227 

If  we  characterize  them  as  myth  and  folk-lore,  we  impeach 
the  veracity  of  the  word  of  God. 

The  reasonableness  of  the  doctrine  just  enunciated  can 
be  seen  from  a  commonplace  example.  A  professor  de- 
livers his  lecture  to  his  hearers,  and  they  commit  the  sense 
of  his  discourse  to  writing,  each  in  a  different  manner.  Pro- 
vided they  relate  faithfully  the  sense  of  what  he  says  they 
may  all  be  said  to  have  his  lecture ;  though  the  words  differ, 
the  sense  remains  the  same,  and  the  sense  is  the  proper 
result  of  inspiration. 

In  the  latter  part  of  the  last  century  a  new  theory  was 
proposed  regarding  verbal  inspiration.  The  advocates  of 
the  new  theory  refuse  to  admit  that  God's  inspiring  act 
affected  the  ideas  differently  from  the  words.  They  extend 
the  act  of  inspiration  to  the  sense  and  the  words.  They 
depart  from  the  cruder  mechanical  theory  of  verbal  inspira- 
tion, and  raise  the  question  more  into  the  psychological 
order.  But  among  the  advocates  of  this  new  view  of  verbal 
inspiration  there  is  not  a  consensus.  Some  of  them  in  sub- 
stance are  in  accord  with  the  views  which  we  here  defend. 
It  is  in  many  cases  merely  a  question  of  terms.  We  admit 
an  influence  of  God  on  the  words ;  and  the  words  of  Scripture 
are  inspired  words,  because  they  are  the  signs  of  inspired 
ideas.  We  do  not  say  that  God  is  the  Author  of  the  ideas, 
and  man  is  the  author  of  the  words ;  because  the  inspired 
writer  was  under  the  influence  of  inspiration  when  he  wrote 
the  words,  and  the  action  of  God  upon  his  faculties  is  re- 
flected in  the  words  he  employed ;  h^M  we  believe  that  God's 
action  left  to  man  to  use  his  faculites  in  expressing  the  con- 
ceptions of  his  mind,  even  while  he  remained  under  the 
influence  of  inspiration.  Hence,  as  Jerome  says,  Paul  may 
have  used  a  defective  expression  in  Ephesians,  though  the 
expression  can  at  no  time  be  so  defective  as  not  to  convey 
God's  meaning.. 

Lagrange,  though  an  advocate  of  verbal  inspiration,  is 
obliged  to  admit  that  the  action  of  God  does  not  affect  the 
words  in  the  same  manner  as  the  sense:  "Without  doubt 
between  the  thought  and  the  word  there  exists  an  intrinsic 
dift'erence ;  therefore  inspiration  does  not  affect  them  in  the 


228  VERBAL   INSPIRATION 

same  manner.  The  thought  should  be  true,  the  word 
should  be  apt;  therefore  under  the  influence  of  the  divine 
light  the  judgment  will  be  true,  the  terms  and  other  ac- 
cessories will  be  fittingly  chosen.  If  this  is  what  certain 
modem  writers  mean  in  distinguishing  between  inspiration 
for  the  thoughts  and  assistance  for  the  words  we  are  sub- 
stantially in  accord  with  them."     (Revue  Biblique,  1896, 

P-  215.)       • 

It  would  seem  at  first  sight  that  there  were  no  substantial 
difference  of  opinion  between  the  advocates  of  the  new  exe- 
gesis and  us  on  the  subject  of  inspiration,  but  in  reality  one 
of  the  fundamental  tenets  of  their  system  lies  here.  While 
they  grant  to  the  inspired  author  the  same  liberty  that  we 
grant  him,  they  insist  that  his  material  words  be  still  termed 
inspired.  They  do  this  for  the  purpose  of  demanding  the 
same  liberty  of  the  human  element  in  the  thoughts  them- 
selves. Thus  Lagrange  proposes  the  system:  'Tt  would 
be  imreasonable  to  say  that  God  in  the  same  manner  wills 
the  thoughts  and  the  words,  that  he  attaches  the  same  im- 
portance to  the  words  as  to  the  thoughts,  or  inspires  both  in 
the  same  manner.  We  do  not  wish  to  be  narrower  than 
Franzelin,  but  broader.  He  abandoned  the  theory  that 
the  words  were  the  (material)  words  of  God,  because  he 
foimd  it  difficult  to  find  in  them  the  perfection  of  things 
immediately  revealed.  We  demand  the  same  liberty  for 
the  thoughts,  and  it  is  scarcely  exact  to  call  them  (the 
thoughts)  sensa  Dei,  an  expression  which  easily  might  be- 
come exclusive"  (Revue  Biblique,  1904,  p.  294).  The  argu- 
ment here  is  most  illogical  and  inconsistent.  If,  by  his  own 
admission,  the  thoughts  are  more  important  than  the  words ; 
if  inspiration  affects  them  differently,  how  can  he  demand 
the  same  liberty  for  the  thoughts  as  Franzelin  demands  for 
the  words  ? 

In  his  work,  (Die  Schriftinspiration,  1891),  Dr.  Dausch 
declared :  "To  separate  inspired  elements  from  non-inspired 
elements  of  Holy  Writ  is  like  the  distinction  between 
verbal  inspiration  and  sense  inspiration,  more  or  less  a 
vivisection  of  the  living  efficacy  of  the  Spirit."  This  phrase 
has  been  adopted  by  many  to  support  the  theory  of  verbal 


VERBAL   INSPIRATION  229 

inspiration.  Without  doubt  to  remove  the  influence  of  God 
entirely  from  the  actual  words  of  Holy  Scripture  might  be 
called  vivisection ;  but  that  term  can  not  apply  to  the  theory 
which  we  have  defended.  We  believe  therefore  that  in- 
spired thoughts  influence  the  words  by  which,  with  God's 
assistance,  they  are  expressed;  we  believe  that  the  super- 
natural enlightenment  of  the  mind  favorably  reacts  upon  the 
power  of  expression ;  we  believe  that  God  assisted  the  writers 
so  that  infallible  truth  was  competently  expressed ;  but  we 
believe  at  the  same  time  that  the  writers  exercised  a  certain 
liberty  in  the  choice  of  words  and  expressions;  that  they 
reveal  their  genius  and  education  in  these ;  that  certain  liter- 
ary defects  are  found  in  the  words ;  and  that  certain  things 
might  have  been  better  expressed.  We  believe  also  that 
the  action  of  God  is  directed,  as  to  its  more  immediate  ob- 
ject, to  the  sense  of  Holy  Scripture;  and  consequently  the 
human  element  is  greater  in  the  words  than  in  the  thoughts. 
The  authoritative  teaching  of  the  Catholic  Church  pro- 
claims the  Scriptures  to  be  God's  infallible  word,  and  con- 
sequently free  from  error.  It  is  clear  that  it  is  the  mind  of 
the  Church  to  make  the  inerrancy  of  the  Scriptures  the  effect 
of  its  inspired  character,  to  derive  it  from  God's  authorship. 
If  a  man  denies  the  infallibility  of  Holy  Scripture  in  things 
of  faith  and  morals  he  is  a  heretic :  if  he  limits  the  inerrancy 
of  Holy  Scripture  to  things  of  faith  and  morals  only  he  is  not 
far  from  being  a  heretic.  Of  course  this  applies  to  the  Scrip- 
tures as  they  came  from  the  inspired  writers;  and  to  the 
versions  in  the  measure  that  they  are  authentic.  The  defin- 
ition of  the  Council  of  Trent  guarantees  that  the  Vulgate  is 
authentic  in  things  of  faith  and  morals. 

While  all  Scripture  is  true,  all  Scripture  is  not  true  in  the 
same  way.  The  sense  that  the  Scriptures  affirm  is  always 
true.  The  parable  and  allegory  are  not  true  as  history, 
^  because  they  are  not  written  as  history.  They  are  true  as 
moral  illustrations,  because  their  sense  is  a  moral  illustra- 
tion. That  which  is  written  as  parable  is  true  as  parable; 
that  which  is  written  as  poetry  is  true  as  poetry ;  that  which 
is  written  as  allegory  is  true  as  allegory ;  that  which  is  writ- 
ten as  history  is  true  as  history;  and  that  which  is  written 


230  INSPIRATION  AND   HISTORY 

as  doctrinal  or  moral  teaching  is  a  true  law  of  belief  and 
conduct.  For  this  cause  the  historical  method  of  Lagrange 
is  rejected,  because  it  makes  a  congeries  of  folk-lore,  legends, 
and  myths  that  which  is  written  as  history. 

There  may  be  times  when  it  is  difficult  to  discern  that 
which  is  strictly  historical  from  that  which  is  fictitious  his- 
tory. Such  difficulty  will  never  obscure  the  way  of  belief 
or  conduct.  Some  believe  that  Tobias  or  Judith  or  Ruth  is 
a  fictitious  history.  The  Church  has  not  defined  the  ques- 
tion. To  deal  with  it,  one  must  examine  the  evidence,  and 
see  whether  the  object  of  the  writer  be  to  write  real  or  fictitious 
history.  The  object  of  the  writer  is  always  to  write  the 
truth;  his  fictitious  history  is  not  less  true  than  his  real 
history :  it  is  true  in  the  sense  proper  to  its  nature  as  a  genus 
of  literature  which  the  Holy  Scripture  can  use.  It  incul- 
cates principles  of  truth  and  duty  by  concrete  examples. 
While  conservative  opinion  holds  that  Job  is  a  historical 
personage,  the  great  drama  of  the  Book  of  Job  is  largely  a 
creation  of  the  poet's  inspired  mind  to  illustrate  infallibly 
true  principles.  Hence  in  judging  of  an  inspired  book,  we 
must  have  regard  to  its  character  to  determine  in  what 
sense  it  is  true.  Prophecy  has  its  peculiar  character,  its 
visions  and  its  symbols;  poetry  has  its  poetic  flights  of  im- 
agination ;  parable  and  allegory  make  fictitious  entities  act 
and  speak  their  message;  while  real  history  declares  its 
message  by  relating  facts.  There  is  no  place  in  Scripture 
for  folk-lore  or  myth,  for  these  relate  the  legends  of  a  people 
as  real  history. 

We  must  realize  also  that  inspiration  is  only  a  partial 
participation  of  the  divine  light.  God  does  not  speak  to 
us  in  the  Scriptures  more  divino,  but  in  a  human  manner. 
He  condescends  to  us  as  we  condescend  to  address  a  child. 
The  books  therefore  of  Holy  Scripture  contain  the  evidences 
of  imperfection  due  to  their  human  origin;  but  God's  in- 
spiration moves  the  writers  to  write  nothing  but  the  truth- 
The  writers  were  not  critical  historians ;  but  the  Spirit  of  God 
supplied  where  human  knowledge  failed. 

Another  important  hermeneutical  principle  is  that  the 
sense  of  an  inspired  writer  may  have  a  wider  range  than  he 


DEVELOPMENT  231 

comprehends.  That  which  he  means  to  utter  is  the  sense  of 
God,  but  that  very  sense  may  be  greater  than  he  compre- 
hends. This  principle  was  clearly  admitted  by  the  Fathers : 
"Perhaps  not  even  St.  John  spoke  (of  the  Word)  as  it  is,  but 
as  he,  being  a  man,  was  able ;  because  he,  a  man,  spoke  of 
God,  he  was  verily  inspired  but  still  a  man.  .  .  .  There- 
fore being  a  man  inspired,  he  uttered  not  all;  but  what  he 
could,  being  a  man."  (Aug.  On  John  I.,  i.)  St.  Jerome 
(On  Eph.  III.,  5)  admits  that  the  mystery  of  the  incarnation 
"was  not  known  to  the  patriarchs  and  prophets  as  it  is  now 
known  to  the  apostles  and  saints:  it  is  one  thing  to  know 
future  things  in  a  vision ;  it  is  another  thing  to  contemplate 
them  now  fulfilled."  St.  Thomas  sums  up  the  question  in 
his  usual  clear  way:  "We  must  know  that  since  the  mind 
of  the  prophet  is  an  imperfect  instrument,  even  the  true 
prophets  did  not  know  all  that  the  Holy  Ghost  intended  in 
their  visions,  words,  and  deeds."  (2.  2.  173.  4.)  This 
principle  is  also  promulgated  in  the  bull  "Providentissimus 
Deus. 

It  results  therefore  that  the  Church,  by  the  aid  of  the 
Holy  Spirit,  may  grow  in  the  understanding  of  certain  truths 
whose  full  import  not  even  the  original  writers  grasped.  We 
see  also  a  certain  growth  in  the  clearness  of  the  revelation 
of  Christ  in  the  Old  Testament,  and  those  closer  to  the  ful- 
fillment of  the  prophecies  saw  with  clearer  view  than  those 
of  old.  Similarly  in  the  Church  there  is  a  lawful  growth  in 
the  understanding  of  doctrine.  The  Church  has  always 
taught  the  infallible  truth;  has  always  been  adequately 
equipped  to  teach  men ;  and  must  always  preserve  an  identity 
of  doctrine.  But  she  is  a  living  Church;  and  the  Holy 
Ghost  abides  with  her  all  days  to  teach.  It  follows  from  her 
life,  and  from  the  abiding  of  the  Spirit  that  she  grows  in 
knowledge  of  the  truths  which  were  delivered  to  her  in  the 
beginning.  Thus  her  unity  and  identity  of  teaching  stand 
with  her  growth  in  knowledge. 

We  have  before  spoken  of  the  manner  in  which  the  in- 
spired Scriptures  deal  with  natural  sciences.  St.  Augustine 
rightly  declares:  "It  is  not  read  in  the  Gospel  that  the 
Lord  said:  *I  send  you  the  Paraclete  who  shall  teach  you  of 


232  INSPIRATION   AND   SCIENCE 

tJ:ie  course  of  the  sun  and  the  moon.'  He  wished  to  make 
them  Christians,  not  mathematicians. ' '  (De  actis  cimi  FeHce 
Manichaeo,  I.,  lo.) 

It  does  not  follow  from  this  that  when  the  Scriptures 
speak  of  the  stars,  plants,  animals,  etc.,  that  they  are  not 
veracious,  for  ''no  one  except  an  impious  man  or  infidel 
doubts  of  the  veracity  of  Scripture."  (Aug.  On  Gen.  VII., 
28.) 

The  truths  of  salvation  are  directly  inspired;  the  other 
truths  are  indirectly  inspired,  on  account  of  their  relation 
to  the  direct  object  of  inspiration.  But  in  speaking  of  things 
of  natural  science,  the  Holy  Scriptures  have  not  treated  them 
to  the  end  to  teach  the  people  science ;  they  have  not  treated 
such  matters  from  the  scientist's  viewpoint :  ''Moses  con- 
descending to  a  rude  people,  spoke  of  things  as  they  sensibly 
appeared."  (St.  Thomas,  Summa,  I.,  q.  70.)  The  sacred 
writers  make  use  of  the  common  parlance  of  the  people: 
"secundum  opinionem  populi  loquitur  Scriptura."  (S.  Th. 
I.  2.  198.)  A  question  of  vital  importance,  in  our  days,  is 
the  relation  of  Scripture  to  science.  Men's  minds  have 
been  active  ever  since  the  writing  of  Scripture  itself,  and 
have  found  many  things  unknown  at  the  time  of  the  writing 
of  the  Holy  Books.  They  have  delved  down  deep  into  the 
mysterious  storehouse  of  nature,  have  discovered  her  treas- 
ures, have  imprisoned  her  mighty  forces  to  do  their  will  and 
serve  them  in  the  affairs  of  their  civil  and  domestic  life. 
They  have  penetrated  the  heavens,  and  investigated  the 
secrets  of  the  vast  expanse  which  men  call  the  firmament. 
Many  truths,  and  many  more  or  less  reasonable  hypotheses 
have  been  thus  found  out.  But  science,  proud  of  her  achieve- 
ments, and  restless  under  restraint,  too  oft  turns  her  powers 
against  the  God-given  truths  of  the  Sacred  Text,  and  here 
the  warfare  waxes  bitter  indeed,  and  many  there  are  who 
incline  too  much  to  the  side  of  science,  even  of  those  of  the 
household  of  faith.  Since  the  time  of  Galileo,  men  have 
conceded  that  the  Scriptures  spoke  according  to  the  com- 
mon opinions  of  the  people,  and  attributed  significations  to 
words,  which  the  vulgar  speech  of  the  day  warranted.  For 
God  made  use  of  a  human  medium  to  convey  his  message  to 


,  INSPIRATION   AND   SCIENCE  233 

man,  and  he  did  not  startle  the  people  by  strange  expres- 
sions, which  would  have  been  unintelligible  to  all  people 
at  that  stage  of  human  development.  Men  speak  thus  to- 
day, and  are  not  accused  of  inexactness  or  with  combating 
science.  Hence,  with  this  in  mind,  we  can  reconcile  the 
assertions  of  true  science  with  the  inspired  Word  of  God,  for 
there  can  be  no  combat  between  truth  and  truth;  for  the 
Author  of  both  human  and  divine  science  is  the  Essential 
and  Infinite  Truth.  ''For  although  faith  is  above  reason, 
no  real  discussion,  no  real  conflict  can  be  found  between 
them  since  both  arise  from  one  and  the  same  fount  of  im- 
mutable and  eternal  truth,  the  great  and  good  God. ' '  (Pius 
IX.,  Encyc.  of  Nov.  9,  1846.)  Some  hypotheses  broached 
by  the  incredulous  and  shallow  dabbler  in  science  may  con- 
flict with  the  truths  of  Scripture,  but  this  imports  nothing. 
The  Church  blesses  scientific  research,  and  fears  nothing 
therefrom.  She  invites  investigation  into  every  field  of 
htmian  thought,  and  only  good  to  herself  can  come  there- 
from. The  greatest  scientists  and  historians  are  her  faith- 
ful children.  The  Vatican  Council  approved  of  scientific 
research  explicitly,  even  when  all  the  resources  of  science 
were  brought  to  bear  to  oppose  the  Church.  It  leaves 
science  free  to  use  its  own  methods.  * 'Neither  does  the 
Church  forbid  that  these  sciences  should,  in  their  own  do- 
main, use  their  own  principles  and  methods."  (Cone.  Vat. 
De  Fide,  IV.) 

Hence  we  should  guard  against  attributing  to  a  passage 
of  Scripture  a  signification,  which  in  se  it  has  not,  but  which 
may  have  been  given  to  it  by  some  interpreter.  When  we 
find  by  incontestable  evidence  that  science  has  demon- 
strated a  truth,  which  is  in  seeming  opposition  to  what  has 
by  some  been  held  to  be  the  opinion  gleaned  from  the  Holy 
Scriptures,  we  should  seek  some  other  interpretation,  which 
the  text  must  bear,  as  truth  and  truth  can  not  conflict,  and 
we  can  thus  reconcile  these  two  truths  coming  from  different 
sources.  In  this  manner,  we  may  reconcile  Gen.  I.  14 :  "And 
God  said  let  there  be  luminaries  in  the  firmament  of  heaven. 
.  .  .  And  God  made  two  great  luminaries,  a  greater  lumin- 
ary to  rule  the  day  and  a  lesser  luminary  to  rule  the  night, 


234  INSPIRATION   AND  SCIENCE 

and  the  stars."  Now  it  would  seem  from  this  that  the  stars 
were  less  in  magnitude  than  the  moon'.  As  science  has  in- 
disputably proven  the  contrary,  what  must  we  admit? 
That  the  inspired  writer  spoke  according  to  the  appearance 
of  things,  and  for  us  the  moon  is  a  greater  luminary  than  the 
stars.  Hence,  even' the  sun  is  not  necessarily  asserted  to  be 
a  greater  luminary  in  fact  than  the  stars,  but  only  in  appear- 
ance. 

Two  obstacles  obstruct  the  way  of  harmony  between 
Scripture  and  science ;  videlicet,  the  narrowness  of  view  of 
many  who  essay  to  defend  the  Scriptures,  and  the  pride  and 
presimiption  of  orientalists  and  scientists  who  fail  to  recog- 
nize that  there  is: 

'*A  deep  below  the  deep, 

And  a  height  beyond  the  height ; 
Our  hearing  is  not  hearing. 
And  our  seeing  is  not  sight." 

Shallow  draughts  of  science  intoxicate  the  brain ;  drink- 
ing deeply  sobers  us.  The  man  of  large  mind  will  be  con- 
scious of  his  own  limitations;  conscious  that  much  that 
passes  as  science  is  a  congeries  of  hypotheses,  many  of  which 
change  with  the  course  of  time.  The  exegete  must  also 
realize  that  where  the  Church  has  not  defined  the  question 
**one  should  not  so  tenaciously  adhere  to  any  exposition 
formerly  believed  to  be  true,  that  he  would  not  abandon  it 
when  clearly  proven  to  be  false,  lest  the  Scriptures  be  de- 
rided by  the  unbelieving,  and  a  way  to  belief  be  cut  off  from 
them"  (St.  Th.  2.  Sent.  12.) 

At  no  time  in  the  history  of  the  world  have  men's  ideas 
of  natural  science  been  absolutely  correct.  In  time  they 
never  will  be  absolutely  correct.  We  may  know  some 
things  better  than  the  ancients;  but  there  are  many  more 
which  we  shall  never  know.  God  decreed  to  use  men  at 
certain  epochs  of  history  to  deliver  a  body  of  truths  to  men. 
Incidentally  they  spoke  of  certain  natural  phenomena.  They 
used  the  language  of  their  time,  as  men  have  done  in  every 
age  of  the  world.  They  spoke  of  the  material  universe  as 
it  appeared  to  men.  The  language  which  they  employed 
was  scientifically  imperfect;  but  they  uttered  no  falsehood. 


INSPIRATION   AND  HISTORY  235 

They  used  an  imperfect  medium  to  convey  to  man  the  in- 
fallible message  of  God.  The  inspired  writer's  conceptions 
of  nature  were  imperfect,  and  God  did  not  by  a  necessary 
miracle  remove  this  imperfection  before  making  him  an  in- 
strument to  utter  a  message  in  which  scientific  facts  are  only 
indirectly  contemplated.  In  these  enunciations  concern- 
ing natural  phenomena  there  is  a  direct  sense  and  an  in- 
direct sense.  When  it  is  said  that  at  the  voice  of  Joshua  the 
sun  stood  still,  the  direct  sense  is  that  the  light  of  day  was 
miraculously  prolonged;  and  that  fact  is  affirmed  in  the 
language  of  the  writer's  time. 

A  question  of  paramount  importance  is  now  to  determine 
whether  we  shall  apply  to  history  that  same  latitude  that 
we  give  to  things  of  natural  science ;  that  is  whether  we  shall 
concede  that  the  inspired  historians  wrote  history  according 
to  popular  belief.  Lagrange  and  his  school  affirm  this,  and 
make  that  the  cardinal  principle  of  the  so-called  "historical 
method."  Not  content  with  asserting  the  theory,  some  of 
them,  with  amazing  audacity,  appeal  to  the  encyclical  'Trov- 
identissimus  Deus"  in  support  of  their  hypothesis.  It  is  to 
set  a  low^  value  on  human  intelligence  to  ascribe  such  a  view 
to  the  encyclical.  The  Holy  Father  wishes  **his  principles 
applied  to  cognate  sciences  and  especially  to  history;"  but 
it  is  clear  that  what  he  means  is  that  we  must  defend  Scrip- 
ture not  only  against  scientists,  but  against  orientalists  and 
historians,  whose  methods  the  Holy  Father  exposes  in  the 
very  same  paragraph.  There  is  not  a  word  in  the  whole 
encyclical  favorable  to  the  "historical  method."  The  con- 
text clearly  estabHshes  the  pontiff's  meaning  to  be  that,  as 
we  are  to  refute  scientists  when  they  teach  falsely,  and  as  we 
are  to  show  that  what  they  have  proven  is  not  contrary  to 
the  Scriptures,  so  we  are  to  deal  with  history  and  other 
cognate  sciences.  And  the  pontiff  immediately  proceeds 
to  state  the  errors  of  historians  who  wage  war  on  the  Holy 
Scriptures. 

It  is  clear  that  there  is  a  vast  difference  between  the 
scientific  statements  and  the  historical  statements  of  the  Bible. 
The  very  essence  of  history  is  to  narrate  facts.  We  have 
given  a  fit  place  to  allegory  and  parable,  lyric  poem  and 


236  INSPIRATION    AND    HISTORY 

drama.  Here  we  speak  of  history  which  the  writer  wrote 
as  history.  Every  genus  of  literature  which  the  Bible 
employs  must  be  true  in  the  mode  competent  to  its  nature. 
Therefore  that  which  is  written  as  history  must  be  true  as 
history.  When  the  Scriptures  say:  "God  made  the  firma- 
ment, and  divided  the  waters  which  were  under  the  firma- 
ment from  the  waters  which  were  above  the  firmament," 
the  purpose  of  the  proposition  is  not  to  teach  men  the  nature 
of  the  heavens,  but  to  assert  that  God  created  the  heavens, 
and  gave  to  nature  her  laws.  The  truths  of  Scripture  are 
conceived  in  a  human  manner.  Nature  is  spoken  of  as 
men  contemplated  it :  in  this  regard  the  inspired  writer  is  a 
child  of  his  time,  and  his  scientific  knowledge  is  not  in  ad- 
vance of  his  epoch.  There  is  truth  in  his  statement,  the 
truth  he  intended  to  convey:  there  is  imperfection  in  the 
accessory. 

But  when  the  Scriptures  say  that  Cain  rose  against  Abel 
and  slew  him,  or  that  God  rained  fire  and  brimstone  upon 
Sodom,  if  these  events  be  the  creation  of  folk-lorists,  there 
is  no  truth  in  them;  they  are  false  beliefs  narrated  as  his- 
tory. The  nature  of  the  narration  of  such  facts  and  their 
context  take  them  out  of  the  category  of  allegory  and  para- 
ble ;  they  are  narrated  as  history,  and  must  be  true  as  his- 
tory. The  object  of  the  writer  is  to  teach  men  this  very 
history,  and  to  move  men  to  believe  it.  It  may  be  called 
primitive  history;  but  it  still  remains  true  history.  The 
fact  that  many  myths  and  fables  mingle  in  the  primitive 
history  of  other  peoples  does  not  necessitate  that  the  history 
of  the  origin  of  the  universe  as  related  in  the  Bible  must  also 
have  its  myths  and  legends.  By  the  fact  of  divine  inspira- 
tion the  history  narrated  in  the  Bible  transcends  all  other 
history,  for  the  reason  that  it  is  infallibly  true.  The  his- 
torical parts  of  Holy  Scripture,  and  in  fact  all  its  parts,  are 
subject  to  proper  hermeneutical  laws  to  determine  their 
sense ;  but  in  the  last  analysis  every  sentence  of  the  Bible, 
as  it  came  from  the  inspired  writer,  must  be  true  in  its  proper 
sense.  History  according  to  popular  beliefs  is  false  history, 
and  can  not  be  a  part  of  the  word  of  God. 


INSPIRATION   AND   HISTORY  237 

Moreover  the  historical  parts  of  the  Bible  are  in  great 
part  the  foundation  of  our  faith.  The  history  of  the  fall  of 
our  first  parents  bears  an  essential  relation  to  the  doctrine 
of  original  sin.  The  Redemption,  the  Resurrection  of 
Christ,  the  foundation  of  the  Church,  the  descent  of  the 
Holy  Ghost  are  historical  facts.  It  is  needless  to  declare 
how  vital  these  are  to  faith. 

One  of  the  common  phrases  of  the  "new  exegesis"  is  to 
declare  the  historical  parts  of  Scripture  relatively  true.  If 
they  wish  to  assert  that  the  Scriptures  are  not  God,  that  the 
Scriptures  are  not  God's  own  infinitely  perfect  utterance,  it 
is  well.  The  Scriptures  are  God's  message  through  human 
utterance  by  the  power  of  God.  They  have  the  impress  of 
their  human  origin  upon  them ;  but  they  also  bear  the  stamp 
of  their  principal  Author,  and  by  His  power  they  are  true 
in  every  part.  Wherefore  if  by  the  phrase  relatively  true 
they  mean  to  say  that  the  Scriptures  contain  anything  that 
is  not  objectively  true,  the  statement  conflicts  with  Catholic 
belief. 

It  is  evident  therefore  that  while  we  admit  fictitious 
history  which  has  its  proper  sense  of  truth,  we  exclude  myth, 
legend  and  folk-lore;  for  these  are  false  narrations  in  the 
guise  of  history.  It  is  an  abuse  of  the  relative  sense  theory 
to  assert  that  ''all  the  wonders  related  during  the  forty 
years  in  the  desert  make  no  necessary  claim  to  be  miracles 
as  we  define  them,  i.  ^.,  strictly  supernatural  occurrences." 
(The  Tradition  of  Scripture,  Barry,  p.  254)  The  writer  of 
"The  Tradition  of  Scripture"  falls  in  with  the  tendency  to 
pare  down  the  supernatural,  and  exalt  the  natural.  It  is  the 
trend  of  the  age  ever  since  protestants  invented  a  religion 
that  is  not  religious.  If  the  miracles  of  the  Exodus  are  in 
reality  only  natural  phenomena  believed  by  a  credulous  age 
to  be  miracles,  the  Bible  has  spoken  falsely,  for  not  in  one 
place  only  does  it  proclaim  these  to  be  true  miracles.  The 
tendency  that  endeavors  to  eliminate  miracles  from  the 
Old  Testament  will  not  stop  there.  It  will  invade  the  New 
Testament  even  to  a  "clever  cut"  at  Christ  himself.  In  the 
Syllabus  of  Pius  IX.  this  proposition  was  condemned :  "The 
prophecies  and  miracles  set  forth  in  narration  in  the  Sacred 


238  INSPIRATION   AND    HISTORY 

Scriptures  are  the  creations  of  poets,  and  the  mysteries  of 
Christian  faith  are  a  synthesis  of  philosophic  investigations : 
myths  are  found  in  both  testaments,  and  Jesus  Christ  is 
himself  a  myth."  The  "Providentissimus  Deus"  most  ex- 
plicitly deplores  and  condemns  the  myth  and  legend  theories 
of  the  "historical  method." 

We  have  before  explained  that  when  the  inspired  writer 
cites  a  testimony  without  either  explicit  or  implicit  approb- 
ation, inspiration  does  not  vouch  for  the  truth  of  the  testi- 
mony. In  such  case  it  is  only  inspiredly  true  that  the  writer 
has  made  such  a  citation ;  the  matter  of  the  testimony  stands 
on  its  own  merit.  But  when  the  writer  uses  a  historical 
source,  and  embodies  it  into  his  history  without  sufficient 
indication  that  he  is  relating  the  words  of  another  without 
endorsing  them,  then,  by  every  law  of  history,  the  inspired 
writer  confers  his  own  authority  to  what  he  writes,  and 
makes  it  his  own.  If  it  were  not  so,  history  would  become 
a  jugglery  of  words,  and  no  man  could  know  what  to  be- 
lieve. 

It  can  not  be  denied  that  many  of  the  sources  whence 
Moses  drew  his  knowledge  of  the  first  chapters  of  Genesis 
were  popular  tradition.  The  form  in  which  facts  are  handed 
down  by  popular  tradition  differs  from  the  style  of  written 
history.  In  the  course  down  from  age  to  age  as  a  general 
thing  many  legends,  myths,  and  superstitions  mix  in  with 
the  stream  of  truth.  The  divine  agency  of  inspiration 
saved  the  inspired  writer  from  handing  down  to  us  any 
thing  false ;  it  allowed  him  to  preserve  the  popular  mode  in 
which  the  truths  were  expressed.  Abstract  principles  are 
expressed  as  concrete  facts.  The  true  historical  fact  that 
man  was  created  immediately  by  God  in  a  state  of  happiness, 
was  tempted  by  the  devil,  and  fell  through  ambitious  pride, 
is  expressed  in  the  form  of  the  allegory  of  the  garden  scene  at 
the  tree  of  the  knowledge  of  good  and  evil.  God  becomes 
anthropomorphic,  walks  in  the  garden,  communes  with  Him- 
self, descends  to  see  the  tower  of  Babel,  etc.  The  truth  of 
history  only  demands  that  there  shall  be  always  an  objec- 
tive reality  of  fact  in  all  these  narrations.  The  fact  is  his- 
torical; the  mode  in  which  it  reached  us  through  popular 
tradition  is  sometimes  allegorical. 


THE  CANON  239 

CHAPTER  III. 
The  Canon. 

Canon,  from  Greek  Kavcov,  originally  meant  any  straight 
rod  or  bar.  From  this  basal  signification  were  formed  the 
cognate  meanings  of  the  amussis  or  carpenter's  rule,  the 
beam  or  tongue  of  the  balance,  and  then,  like  "norma,"  any 
rule  or  standard,  whether  in  the  physical  or  moral  order. 
Hence  it  came  to  be  generally  applied  as  a  rule  or  measure 
of  anything.  It  is  much  controverted,  and  quite  uncertain, 
just  w^hat  particular  shade  of  the  general  meaning  the  old 
writers  had  in  mind  when  they  first  applied  this  word  to  the 
official  list  of  the  Holy  Books.  Such  question  is,  in  fact,  of 
no  real  value  to  any  man,  and  yet  writers  quibble  and  haggle 
about  it,  as  though  upon  it  depended  some  great  question. 
Some  contend  that,  in  applying  the  term  to  the  Holy  Books, 
the  early  writers  passed  from  the  active  signification  of  the 
term  to  its  effect,  and  used  the  measure  for  the  thing  meas- 
ured; thus  the  canon  would  be  the  list  officially  ruled  and 
measured  by  the  Church.  Others  hold  that  the  said  writers 
had  in  mind  that  the  Holy  Books  formed  a  rule  of  faith  and 
morals.  We  are  of  the  persuasion  that  the  term  was  applied 
to  the  collection  of  Scriptures  to  signify  that  such  list  formed 
the  criterion  and  measure  of  a  hook's  divine  origin.  The  list 
was  thus  a  rule;  for  only  the  books  which  satisfied  its 
requirements,  by  being  incorporated  in  it,  were  of  divine 
authority.  At  all  events,  the  signification  of  an  official  list 
of  things  or  persons  dates  back  to  a  great  antiquity.  Thus, 
in  the  Councils  of  Nice  and  Antioch,  the  catalogue  of  the 
sacred  persons  attached  to  any  particular  Church  was  called 
the  canon.  Thus,  to-day,  those  who  constitute  the  chapter 
are  called  Canons.  The  appositeness  of  the  term  all  must 
concede,  for  such  sanctioned  catalogue  forms  a  measure  of 
inspiration,  and  we  receive  only  as  inspired  that  which  con- 
forms to  its  measurement. 

The  canon  of  Holy  Scripture  then  is  the  official  catalogue 
of  the  Books  that  the  Church  authoritatively  promulgates  as  the 
product  of  the  Authorship  of  God. 

This  official  list  is  found  in  the  Council  of  Trent,  Sess. 
4.  De  Can.  Script. :     "The  Synod  has  thought  good  to  sub- 


240  THE    CANON 

join  to  the  decree  an  index  of  the  Holy  Books,  lest  to  any 
man  there  should  arise  a  doubt  as  to  which  are  the  books 
that  are  received  by  the  said  Synod.  These  are  the  follow- 
ing: Of  the  Old  Testament,  the  five  books  of  Moses,  to  wit : 
Genesis,  Exodus,  Leviticus,  Numbers,  Deuteronomy,  Josue, 
Judges,  Ruth,  the  four  Books  of  Kings,  the  two  Books  of 
Paralipomenon,  the  First  Book  of  Esdras  and  the  Second 
which  is  called  that  of  Nehemias,  Tobias,  Judith,  Esther, 
Job,  the  Davidic  Psalter  of  150  Psalms,  Proverbs,  Ecclesi- 
astes,  The  Canticle  of  Canticles,  Wisdom,  Ecclesiasticus, 
Isaias,  Jeremias  with  Baruch,  Ezechiel,  Daniel,  The  Twelve 
Minor  Prophets,  to  wit:  Hosea,  Joel,  Amos,  Abdias,  Jonas, 
Michasas,  Nahum,  Habakuk,  Sophonias,  Haggasus,  Zachary, 
Malachy,  and  The  First  and  Second  of  Maccabees.  Of  the 
New  Testament :  The  Four  Gospels,  according  to  Matthew, 
Mark,  Luke  and  John,  the  Acts  of  The  Apostles,  the  fourteen 
Epistles  of  the  Apostle  St.  Paul,  to  wit :  The  Epistle  to  the 
Romans,  the  two  Epistles  to  the  Corinthians,  the  Epistle  to 
the  Galatians,  the  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians,  the  Epistle  to 
the  Philippians,  the  Epistle  to  the  Colossians,  the  two 
Epistles  to  the  Thessalonians,  the  two  Epistles  to  Timothy, 
the  Epistle  to  Titus,  the  Epistle  to  Philemon,  the  Epistle  to 
the  Hebrews ;  the  two  Epistles  of  St.  Peter,  the  three  Epistles 
of  the  Apostle  John,  one  Epistle  of  the  Apostle  James,  one 
Epistle  of  the  Apostle  Jude,  and  the  Apocalypse  of  the  Apos- 
tle John. "  In  this  catalogue,  there  are  recorded  forty-five 
books  of  the  Old  Testament,  and  twenty-seven  of  the  New. 
As  the  Holy  Books  are  divided  into  two  great  classes,  the 
Old  and  New  Testament,  so  we  must  treat  separately  of  the 
canons  of  these  two  Testaments. 

Chapter  IV. 
The  Canon  of  the  Old  Testament. 
The  books  containing  God's  covenant  to  man  are  desig- 
nated by  three  equivalent  terms  in  the  three  great  Scriptural 
tongues.     In    Hebrew   it    is    n^*13r  i^  Greek,  AcaOtjKTj  and 

in  Latin,  Testament um.  Although  the  etymological  con- 
struction of  these  terms  is  not  exactly  identical,  still,  in  fact, 
their  accepted  sense  in  this  predication  is  the  same,  that  of  a 


THE   CANON  241 

pact,  treaty  or  covenant;  and  they  designate  the  written 
instruments  of  God's  solemn  covenant  with  mankind. 

A  fimdamental  variation  took  place  in  God's  dealings 
with  his  creature  in  the  mission  of  the  Messiah,  and,  as  the 
Greek  language  became  at  that  time  the  principle  medium 
of  religious  thought,  the  changed  and  better  economy  was 
called  in  that  language  the  Y^aivrj  ^LaOrjKr],  in  contradis- 
tinction to  the  HaXaia  IS,ia6r}K7)\  hence  in  Latin,  which 
later  preponderated  as  the  vehicle  of  religious  thought,  the 
terms  were  rendered  by  Vetus  and  Novum  Testamentum, 
whence  come  our  equivalent  English  terms. 

The  books  of  the  Old  Testament  can,  from  their  very 
nature,  be  easily  divided  into  three  great  classes :  the  Law, 
the  Prophets,  and  the  Hagiographa.  Such  division,  in  fact, 
existed  among  the  Jews  from  the  very  earliest  times,  but 
their  arbitrary,  ill-founded  ranging  of  the  different  books 
under  each  particular  class  renders  their  data  worthless. 
By  their  division,  we  must  include  Daniel  among  the  Hagio- 
grapha, while  Joshua,  Judges,  Samuel,  and  Kings  are  enrolled 
among  the  Prophets.  Of  course  the  Law  remained  ever  and 
with  all  a  unique  element,  admitting  no  other  book  to  be 
classified  with  itself.  There  was  also  in  vogue  among 
the  Jews  a  well-known  liturgical  section  of  Hol}^  Scripture, 

the  n1^3D   ^'Dn   or  five  volimies:     The  Canticle  of  Can- 
....  .J. 

tides,  Ruth,  the   Lamentations   of  Jeremiah,  Ecclesiastes 

and  Esther.     These  formed  a  collection  which  was  wont  to 

be  read  on  certain  festal  days  of  the  year. 

Our  Saviour  and  the  Apostles  oft  divided  the  Old  Testa- 
ment in  two  great  divisions,  the  Law  and  the  Prophets ;  thus, 
in  a  general  way,  designating  all  that  was  subsequent  to  the 
Law  as  the  Prophets. 

The  Jews  were  wont  also  to  divide  the  Pentateuch  into 
liturgical  divisions  which  they  call  Ht^^'lBfrom  root  t^'^lD, 

T    T    T  -     T 

to  expound.  These  were  first  arranged  so  that  every  third 
year  the  Pentateuch  was  totally  read  in  the  synagogues. 
Now,  however,  the  Babylonian  mode  prevails  in  all  the 
synagogues,  which  divides  the  Pentateuch  in  fifty-four  para- 
shas,  so  arranged  that,  by  reading  them  on  every  Saturday, 

(16)H.  s. 


242  THE   CANON 

they  finish  the  Pentateuch  within  the  course  of  the  year. 
To  this  usage  St.  James  alludes,  Acts  XV.  21 :  *Tor  Moses 
of  old  time  hath  in  every  city  them  that  preach  him  in  the 
synagogues,  where  he  is  read  every  Sabbath."  These  para- 
shas  are  designated  in  the  Hebrew  text  of  the  Pentateuch 
by  three  £♦  or  three  D*  They  are  designated  by  Q*  if  the 
section  begins  on  the  beginning  of  the  line ;  by  D*  if  it  begins 
in  the  middle  of  the  line.  The  ©♦  is  initial  for  nlniHS 
open,  to  signify  that  the  section  is  an  open  one,  as  it  begins 
with  the  line;  while  D*  is  initial  for  nlDIJlp  closed,  im- 
plying that  the  section  is  shut  up,  as  it  were,  beginning  in  the 
middle  of  the  line.  Thus,  for  instance,  the  first  parasha. 
Gen.  I.  I — VI.  8  inclusively,  is  open;  so  also  the  second,  ex- 
tending from  VI.  9 — XI.  inclusively,  is  open  and  designated 
by  three  Q*  The  parasha,  enclosed  from  Gen.  XXVIII.  11 
— XXXI I.  3,  inclusive,  is  closed,  and  designated  by  three 
Q*  The  parashas  were  subdivided  into  minor  sections, 
designated  in  the  Hebrew  text  by  single  Q*  or  D*  as  they 
respectively  began  either  in  the  beginning  or  middle  of  a 
line.  Later,  they  conjoined  the  reading  of  select  portions  of 
the  Prophets  to  the  sections  of  the  Law.  They  called  these 
n^lBDH   from  root  ICOD  to  dismiss;  because,  after  they 

T   T     :  -  -   T 

were  read,  the  people  were  dismissed.  It  was  in  accord- 
ance with  this  usage,  that  Jesus  Christ  at  Nazareth  read  in 
the  synagogue  the  passage  from  Isaiah,  Luke  IV.  16-19. 
This  haftara  is  not  now  found  among  those  assigned  for 
synagogical  readings.  The  antimessianic  tendency  of  the 
Jews  has  probably  expunged  it. 

Setting  aside,  therefore,  rabbinical  opinions,  we  can 
easily  arrange  all  the  books  under  the  three  great  heads. 
First,  the  Law,  comprising  the  five  books  of  Moses;  second, 
the  Prophets,  comprising  the  four  great  Prophets  and  the 
twelve  minor  Prophets,  and  lastly,  the  Hagiographa,  com- 
posed of  all  the  remaining  books.  However,  modern  writers 
find  it  convenient  to  divide  the  books  in  still  another  way, 
to  facilitate  their  treatment.  In  this  modern  division,  the 
motive  of  classification  is  the  nature  of  the  theme  of  the 
book.     They  thus  divide  them  into  Historical,  Sapiential, 


THE   CANON  243 

Poetic,  and  Prophetic  books.  We  shall  employ  this  division 
in  our  special  introduction  to  the  different  books. 

The  well  known  division  of  both  Testaments  into  the 
protocanonical  and  deuterocanonical  books  seems  to  have 
first  been  employed  by  Sixtus  Sennensis  (1520 — 1569).  In 
his  Bibliotheca  Sancta,  Book  i.  Sec.  i,  he  writes  thus :  "Thus 
Canonical  books  of  the  first  order  we  may  call  protocanonical ; 
the  Canonical  books  of  the  second  order  were  formerly  called 
ecclesiastical,  but  are  now  by  us  termed  deuterocanonical ^ 
Although  retaining  and  making  use  of  this  nomenclature,  we 
in  no  wise  attribute  an  inferior  degree  of  dignity  to  the  books 
of  the  second  canon ;  they  are  in  such  respect  equal,  as  God 
is  the  Author  of  all  of  them.  We  designate  by  the  name  of 
protocanonical,  the  books  concerning  whose  divine  origin 
no  doubts  ever  existed;  while  the  deuterocanonical  books 
are  those  concerning  which  greater  or  less  doubts  were  en- 
tertained for  a  time  by  some,  till  finally  the  genuineness  of  the 
books  was  acknowledged,  and  they  were  solemnly  approved 
by  the  Church. 

The  deuterocanonical  books  of  the  Old  Testament  are 
seven;  Tobias,  Judith,  Wisdom,  Ecclesiasticus,  Baruch  and 
the  two  books  of  Maccabees.  Together  with  these,  there 
are  deuterocanonical  fragments  of  Esther,  (from  the  4th  verse 
of  loth  chapter  to  24th  verse  of  i6th  chapter,  and  Daniel  III. 
2  4-9  o ;  X 1 1 1 ,  X I V . )  The  deuterocanonical  books  of  the  New 
Testament  are  also  seven  in  number :  The  Epistle  to  the  He- 
brews, the  Epistle  of  St.  James,  the  Second  Epistle  of  St. 
Peter,  the  Second  and  Third  Epistle  of  St.  John,  the  Epistle 
of  St.  Jude,  and  the  Apocalypse  of  St.  John.  There  are  also 
deuterocanonical  fragments  of  Mark,  XVI.  9-20 ;  Luke  XXII. 
43-44;  and  John  VII.  53 — VIII.  11.  Many  of  the  protest- 
ants  reject  all  the  deuterocanonical  books  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, and  apply  to  them  the  term  Apocryphal.  It  shall  be  a 
part  of  our  labors  to  defend  the  equal  authority  of  these 
books. 

The  Jewish  mode  of  enumeration  of  their  Holy  Books 
was  as  arbitrary  and  as  worthless  as  was  their  system  of 
division.  Taking  twenty-two,  the  number  of  the  letters  of 
their  alphabet,  as  a  number  of  mystic  signification,  they 


244  THE   CANON 

violently  made  the  number  of  the  Books  of  Holy  Scripture 
conform  thereto.  Josephus  makes  use  of  this  mode  of 
enumeration.  In  his  defense  against  Apion,  he  says :  "For 
we  have  not  an  innumerable  multitude  of  books  among  us 
{as  the  Greeks  have),  disagreeing  from  and  contradicting 
one  another,  but  only  twenty-two  books,  which  contain  the 
records  of  all  past  times;  which  are  justly  believed  to  be 
divine."  [Contra  Apion  I.  8.]  St.  Jerome  also,  in  his 
famous  Prologus  Galeatus  to  the  Books  of  Kings,  testifies 
of  the  existence  of  such  number,  and  explains  its  mystic 
foundation:  *'As  there  are  twenty-two  elements,  by  which 
we  write  in  Hebrew  all  that  which  we  speak,  so  twenty-two 
volumes  are  computed,  by  which,  as  by  letters  and  rudiments, 
the  tender  and  suckling  infancy  of  the  just  man  is  trained  in 
the  doctrine  of  God."  "And  thus  there  are  of  the  Old  Law 
twenty-two  books ;  five  of  Moses,  eight  of  the  Prophets,  and 
nine  of  the  Hagiographa.  Some,  however,  reckon  Ruth  and 
the  Lamentations  among  the  Hagiographa,  and  consider 
that  these  are  to  be  numbered  in  their  individual  number, 
and  thus  they  think  to  be  of  the  Old  Law  twenty-four  books, 
which  John  personifies  in  the  number  of  the  twenty-four 
Ancients  who  adore  the  Lamb."  We  see  then  that  there 
were  two  modes  of  enumeration,  and  the  Fathers  confused 
these  modes  in  trying  to  adjust  their  enumeration  to  the 
Jewish  tradition.  We  can  not  tell  who  was  the  first  to  find 
a  mystic  relation  between  the  Greek  alphabet  of  twenty- 
four  letters  and  the  twenty-four  books,  but  it  must  have 
been  done  after  the  preponderance  of  the  Hellenistic  in- 
fluence. The  appended  schema  will  more  vividly  illustrate 
the  Jewish  mode  of  enumeration  of  the  Holy  Books : 

L  ^^-  n^^^^'^^nn      - -      Genesis 

2.  D*  ntol?^"  nb^) Exodus 

3.  y  ^np^l    ________     Leviticus 

4.  1*  "1?T.l  —    —    —    —    —    —    —    —    Numbers 

5.  n*  D^";)^?!]!  nb^^     _____  Deuteronomy 

6.  V  r^ln^    _________  Joshua 


13.   D*  nl^j;  no  ci'^'^^   —    ^ 


EZRA  245 

7.  V  nni  D^pDt^'     -    -    -    -    Judges  and  Ruth 

8.  r\^b^^r2^ i  Samuel  I  and  II   commonly 

:  (      called  I  and  II  Kmgs. 

9      D*  □''D^D    —    —     1  -^^^S^  ^  ^^^   -^^'  commonly 
•  T  :  (      called  III  and  IV  Kings. 

10.  ^^  ^(TJ!1^: Isaiah 

11.  y  ^\^Tp^  ^n^On^  — f  Jeremiah  and  The 

'  •  •       "^  •  =  •  (     Lamentations. 

12.  b*  ^^^p.in: Ezekiel 

"Hosea,  Joel,  Amos 
Obadiah,Jona,Micah 
Nahum,  Habakuk 
Zephaniah,     Haggai 

Literally  the  twelve  Prophets,  whom  we   I   V  q /^"h  q -ri  q  "h  Malo 

designate   as    the    twelve  minor  Prophets.   I   -^ciJ-Aiariail,  iViaia- 

These,  by  the  Jews,  were  computed  one  book,   |^  chia 

14.  J*  D^^nn  *ipp    —   Liber  Laudum,  or  The  Psalms 

15.  D*  ^b^r? —     The  Proverbs  of  Solomon 

16.  y*  nV^^ Job 

17.  S*  ^i^^jn Daniel 

18.  !i*  ^Nniy Ezra  I  and  II 

19.  |>DWn5^ Chronicles  I  and  II 

20.  n*  nnpi^il Esther 

21.  ^*  nSnIp    — —    — Ecclesiastes 

23.  n*  Dn;i^*n  TC:;     —    —  TheCanticleofCanticles 

By  separating  Ruth  from  Judges,  and  the  Lamentations 
from  Jeremiah,  twenty-four  books  resulted,  and  these  are 
the  books  of  the  Jewish  Canon,  or  as  it  is  commonly  called 
the  Canon  of  Ezra,  from  his  supposed  influence  upon  it.  As 
no  doubts  have  ever  arisen  concerning  these  books,  they 
have  been  called  the  protocanonical  works  or  books  of  the 
First  Canon.  Which  mode  of  computation  is  prior,  it  is 
impossible  to  ascertain  with  certainty.  Loisy  believes  the 
number  twenty-four  to  be  prior,  as  it  seems  to  be  the  Tal- 
mudic  number.     Against  this  is  the  authority  of  Josephus, 


246  EZRA 

who  speaks  of  the  number  twenty-two  as  the  sole  traditional 
one.  A  question  of  so  little  importance  may  well  be  left  in 
its  uncertainty. 

Chapter  V. 
Ezra  and  his  Influence. 

The  history  of  the  canon  of  the  Old  Testament  is  ob- 
scure and  difficult,  through  default  of  reliable  documents. 
In  tracing  it  through  its  remote  antiquity,  we  shall  endeavor 
to  bring  forth  in  their  clearest  light  the  certain  data,  filling 
up  the  lacunae  by  the  best  warranted  conjectures. 

The  nucleus  of  the  Old  Law  was  the  Pentateuch,  or  five 
books  of  Moses.  Around  this  centre  of  development  were 
aggregated  all  the  sacred  writings  of  the  Jews.  .  It  was  the 
n^llH/  the  Law,  par  excellence,  the  divine  book.  The 
subsequent  books,  even  though  by  them  considered  divine, 
were  never  held  equal  in  dignity  to  "the  Law  by  the  hand  of 
Moses."  They  were  but  adjuncts,  participating  in  the  great 
fount.  As  less  reverence  was  entertained  for  these  later 
works,  so  less  care  w^as  taken  in  their  preservation. 

The  Pentateuch  was  kept  in  the  temple ;  it  was  the  war- 
rant of  Israel's  preeminence  over  all  the  nations  of  the  earth. 
It  needed  no  authority  to  canonize  it;  the  character  of  its 
author,  and  the  nature  of  its  contents  were  all  sufficient. 
No  other  book  in  Israel  was  equal  to  it. 

The  other  books  came  into  being  by  degrees.  Most  of 
them  were  first  written  as  detached  chronicles,  annals,  or 
diaries  and  subsequently  compiled  into  their  respective 
volumes.  The  Jews  revered  them,  and  acknowledged  their 
divinity,  but  there  was  not,  at  least  before  Ezra's  time,  any 
central  authority  charged  with  the  office  of  fixing  the  canon. 
Neither  was  there,  before  his  time,  any  official  list  of  the 
books  of  Holy  Scripture.  This  is  clearly  proven  by  many 
proofs.  The  Samaritan  Codex  contains  only  the  Penta- 
teuch.* Had  the  other  books  been  placed  in  a  canon  with 
the  Pentateuch,  the  existence  here  of  the  isolated  Pentateuch 
would    be   inexplicable.      Comely,  in    his    Introductio  in 

*The  Samaritan  Codex  contains  a  spurious  text  of  the  Book  of  Joshua, 
but  it  is  evident  that  it  is  a  later  interpolation. 


EZRA  247 

Libros  Veteris  Testamenti,  maintains  that,  even  before 
the  time  of  Ezra,  there  existed  a  collection  of  sacred  books, 
conjoined  to  the  books  of  Moses.  His  argument  to  prove 
this  is  that  there  is  evidence  that  the  subsequent  books  were 
known  and  revered  by  the  Jews,  and  that  the  preceding 
prophets  influenced  the  later  ones.  Loisy,  in  refuting  this, 
rightly  says  that  it  is  quite  another  thing  to  assert  that  an 
official  collection  had  been  constituted,  and  to  say  that  divers 
books  existed,  were  known,  and  were  revered.  We  hold 
that  these  books  as  they  came  into  being  were  received  by 
the  Jews,  but  that  no  list  was  made  of  them,  and  the  sole 
motive  of  their  inspired  character  was  the  nature  of  the 
writing,  and  the  authority  of  their  authors.  There  is  no 
convincing  data  that  the  prophets  were  commissioned  by 
God  to  determine  the  canon  of  Scripture.  There  seems  to 
be  sufficient  evidence  to  conclude  that,  previous  to  the  time 
of  Ezra,  the  five  books  of  Moses  occupied  a  unique  place  in 
the  literature  of  the  Jews.  It  was  the  written  constitution 
of  Israel's  Yahvistic  polity.  At  times  of  great  defection  in 
religion,  even  the  Thorah  fell  into  disuse  and  oblivion. 
Thus  the  passage  in  11.  Kings,XXIL  8:  "And  Hilkiah  the 
high  priest  said  to  Shaphan  the  scribe:  T  have  found  the 
book  of  the  Law  in  the  house  of  the  Lord' ;  and  Hilkiah  gave 
the  book  to  Shaphan,  and  he  read  it,"  implies  a  pre-existing 
period  of  neglect  and  disuse  of  the  Thorah.  In  those  fierce 
idolatrous  upheavals  in  Israel,  a  stiff  necked  people,  led  by 
an  impious  king,  soon  reduced  all  to  religious  anarchy.  In 
the  restoration  of  the  divine  worship  by  Josiah,  no  mention 
is  made  of  any  other  book  than  the  Law.  Had  the  other 
books  formed  a  collection  with  the  Pentateuch,  they  could 
hardly  be  passed  over  in  such  complete  silence. 

The  Pentateuch  then  from  the  beginning  was  always  the 
basis  and  directing  principle  of  the  religious  and  national 
life  of  the  Jewish  people.  It  suffered  some  vicissitudes  in 
the  various  religious  defections  of  that  people,  but  on  their 
return  to  Yahveh's  Law^  the  Pentateuch  was  the  centre  of 
their  reorganization. 

The  other  books  came  into  being  by  gradual  growth. 
Most  of  these  contained  data  that  by  living  tradition  was 


248  EZRA 

well  known  to  the  people.  The  books  formed  a  scattered 
sacred  literature.  The  writings  of  the  Prophets  gradually 
were  collected  by  their  disciples  and  by  the  learned  in  Israel. 
Thus  copies  of  the  books  subsequent  to  the  Pentateuch 
existed  in  many  places  through  the  nation  but  they  were 
not  united  with  the  Thorah,  nor  considered  of  equal  dignity 
with  it. 

We  come  now  to  deal  with  Ezra  and  his  influence  on 
Scripture,  The  Babylonian  Captivity,  wrought  by  Nebu- 
chadnezzar, had  overthrown  all  the  institutions  of  Israel. 
The  temple  was  destroyed ;  the  priests  dispersed  and  led  into 
captivity ;  the  Holy  Books  in  a  state  of  disorder,  and  Yahveh's 
altars  demolished.  To  bring  Israel  out  of  her  religious  dis- 
order, Ezra  was  sent  with  full  power  from  Artaxerxes.  His 
fitness  for  his  commission  may  be  inferred  from  I.  Ezra 
VII.  6:  '^ — and  he  was  a  ready  scribe  in  the  Law  of 
Moses."  Of  Ezra's  work  as  the  restorer  of  Yahveh's  worship 
and  the  reorganizer  of  Israel's  polity,  we  have  certain  data. 
Concerning,  however,  the  nature  and  extent  of  his  labors  on 
the  divine  books,  we  can  only  form,  at  most,  probable  judg- 
ments, and,  full  oft,  but  conjectural  opinions. 

Up  to  our  days,  the  belief  has  been  almost  general  that 
Ezra  revised  the  sacred  books,  and  fixed  the  Canon.  That 
he  wrought  some  important  effects  on  the  sacred  books, 
we  may  not  reasonably  doubt.  But  to  determine  the  exact 
nature  and  extent  of  his  influence  is  impossible,  through  de- 
fect of  documents.  In  all  questions  of  this  nature,  the  judg- 
ments of  men  will  be  divergent.  And  so  in  this  question 
men  have  thought  differently.  The  preponderance  of  Catho- 
lic thought  has  been  that  Ezra  compiled  and  fixed  the  Canon. 
Prominent  among  those  who  have  held  this  opinion  are 
Serarius,  Bellarmine,  Bonfrere,  Huet,  Frassen;  and  more 
recently  Welte,  Herbst,  Glaire,  Scholz,  Himpel,  Ubaldi  and 
Comely.  The  most  eminent  Catholic  writers  who  reject, 
in  whole  or  part,  the  old  theory  of  the  constitution  of  the 
Canon  by  Ezra  are,  Richard  Simon,  Movers,  Nickes,  Malou, 
Danko,  Kaulen  and  Loisy. 

As  rationalistic  principles  have  thoroughly  pervaded 
protestant  Scriptural  thought  it  will  not   aid  our  investi- 


EZRA  249 

gation  to  bring  forth  and  classify  the  protestant  opinion 
concerning  the  influence  of  Ezra  on  the  Jewish  Canon. 

The  Talmud  furnishes  us  some  curious  data  on  the  Canon. 
The  treatise  of  the  Mischna,  called  nlD^^  ''P*!?'  (the  Chap- 
ters of  the  Fathers)  opens  with  a  testimony  concerning 
Holy  Scripture:  ''Moses  received  the  Law  on  Sinai  and 
delivered  it  to  Jehoshua.  Jehoshua  delivered  it  to  the 
Elders.  The  Elders  delivered  it  to  the  Prophets.  The 
Prophets  delivered  it  to  the  men  of  the  Great  Synagogue.'' 
The   Talmudic   treatise   ^^"^2  ^^23,    (The  Last   Gate)  of 

T    :    -         T  T 

the  Babylonic  Gemara  is  more  explicit.  In  folios  14  b  and 
15  a,  it  is  written:  ''Who  wrote  the  Holy  Books?  Moses 
wrote  his  book,  the  section  concerning  Bileam  and  Job. 
Jehoshua  wrote  his  book  and  eight  verses  in  the  Law.  Sam- 
uel wrote  his  book,  the  book  of  Judges  and  Ruth.  David 
wrote  the  Book  of  Psalms  by  means  of  ten  Ancients,  Adam 
the  first,  Melchisedech,  Abraham,  Moses,  Heman,  Iduthun, 
Asaph  and  the  three  sons  of  Kore.  Jeremiah  wrote  his  books 
the  Book  of  Kings  and  the  Lamentations.  Hezekiah  and  his 
colleagues  wrote  Isaiah,  Proverbs,  the  Canticle  of  Canticles, 
and  Ecclesiastes.  The  men  of  the  Great  Synagogue  wrote 
Ezechiel,  the  twelve  Prophets,  Daniel,  and  the  volume  of 
Esther.  Ezra  wrote  his  book,  and  continued  the  genealogies 
of  the  Chronicles  up  to  his  time." 

We  now  join  with  these  testimonies  that  of  the  apocry- 
phal fourth  book  of  Ezra,  IV.  Ezra  XIV.  22-26:  "For  if  I 
have  found  favor  in  thee,  send  in  me  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  I 
will  write  all  that  which  was  done  in  time  since  the  beginning, 
the  things  that  were  written  in  thy  law,  that  men  might  find 
the  path ;  and  that  they  who  will  live  in  the  last  days  may 
live.  And  he  made  answer  to  me  and  said :  'Go  and  summon 
the  people,  and  say  to  them  that  they  shall  not  seek  thee  for 
forty  days,  and  do  thou  prepare  for  thyself  many  writing 
tablets,  and  take  with  thee  Sarea,  Dabrea,  Salemia,  Echan 
and  Asiel,  those  five,  who  are  able  to  write  quickly,  and 
come  hither,  and  I  will  enkindle  in  thy  heart  the  light  of 
intellect,  which  shall  not  be  extinguished  imtil  thou  shalt 

*  The  commentatorial  treatises  of  the  Gemara  were  called  gates,  since 
they  opened  the  way  for  the  intelligence  of  the  different  truths. 


250  EZRA 

have  finished  the  things  thou  shalt  have  begun  to  write. 
And  then,  a  part  thou  shalt  openly  manifest  to  the  perfect, 
and  a  part  thou  shalt  deliver  secretly  to  the  wise;  on  the 
morrow,  at  this  hour,  thou  shalt  begin  to  write." 

''And  I  was  brought  to  the  morrow;  and,  behold, 
a  voice  called  me  saying:  'Ezra,  open  thy  mouth  and  drink 
that  which  I  will  give  thee  to  drink.'  And  I  opened  my 
mouth,  and  behold  a  full  cup  was  held  out  to  me.  This 
was  filled  with  water,  and  the  color  thereof  as  of  fire,  and 
I  took  and  drank ;  and  when  I  had  drunk,  my  heart  was  ex- 
ceedingly filled  with  knowledge,  and  in  my  bosom  wisdom 
grew.  For  the  memory  of  my  spirit  was  strengthened.  And 
my  mouth  was  opened,  and  was  no  more  closed.  The  Most 
High  gave  understanding  to  the  five  men,  and  they  wrote 
the  visions  of  the  night  which  were  told  them,  and  which  they 
knew  not.  And  at  night  they  ate  bread.  But  I  spoke 
through  the  day,  and  through  the  night  I  was  not  silent. 
And  there  were  written,  during  forty  days,  204  books.  And 
it  came  to  pass,  after  forty  days,  the  Most  High  spoke  say- 
ing :  'The  first  things  thou  hast  written  make  openly  mani- 
fest, and  let  the  worthy  and  the  unworthy  read ;  but  the  lat- 
ter seventy  preserve,  that  thou  mayest  give  them  to  the 
wise  men  of  thy  people.  For  in  these  is  the  vein  of  under- 
standing, and  the  fount  of  wisdom,  and  the  stream  of  knowl- 
edge.'    And  I  did  so."     (Ibid.  38-47.) 

Up  to  the  eighteenth  century,  the  Latin  of  the  Vulgate 
was  the  only  text  preserved  to  us  of  IV.  Ezra.  Since  then 
there  have  been  discovered  the  Arabic,  Ethiopian,  Syriac, 
and  Armenian  versions.  In  these  the  whole  number  of 
books  is  placed  at  ninety-four  instead  of  204;  w^hence,  if  we 
subtract  the  seventy  which  were  to  remain  hidden  for  the 
sole  use  of  the  wise  men,  we  shall  have  the  traditional  num- 
ber twenty-four  of  the  Jewish  Canon. 

Comely  makes  much  of  this  testimony  as  being  built 
upon  the  true  basis  of  Jewish  tradition.  We  confess,  though 
admitting  some  basis  of  truth,  we  can  not  find  anything  in 
it  that  would  convince  the  intellect  that  Ezra  fixed  the 
Canon.  The  role  of  Ezra  as  a  second  promulgator  of  the 
Law  would  be  sufficient  basis  for  the  rabbinical  fable. 


EZRA  251 

We  have  not  adduced  these  testimonies  as  peremptory- 
proofs  of  anything.  They  are  all  more  or  less  imbued  with 
rabbinic  fable.  But  perhaps,  there  may  be  some  slight  truth 
in  these  which  has  been  distorted  by  the  vagaries  of  the 
Rabbis,  till  it  is  hard  to  glean  it  from  the  composite  mass. 

We  believe  that  the  tradition  of  the  Christian  Fathers 
will  give  us  small  help  in  this  investigation.  As  it  was 
merely  a  critical  question,  and  in  nowise  connected  with 
faith,  the  authority  of  the  Fathers  could  only  be  considered 
in  its  critical  character.  Now  it  is  evident  to  the  tyro  of 
patrology  that  the  Fathers  are  least  valuable  as  critics.  As 
simple  witnesses  of  the  faith,  they  are  beacon  lights;  but 
when  we  turn  to  their  critical  character,  we  find  little  of 
value.  Most  of  those  who  have  delivered  to  us  that  Ezra 
fixed  the  canon,  based  their  assertions  on  the  Fourth  Book  of 
Ezra,  a  book  filled  with  rabbinic  fable,  impossible  supersti- 
tion, and  erroneous  dogma.  St.  Irenaeus,  St.  Clement  of 
Alexandria,  Tertullian,  St.  Basil,  Theodoret,  St.  Optatus,  and 
others  have  relied  implicitly  on  the  testimony  of  the  Fourth 
Book  of  Ezra.  Some,  as  St.  Chrysostom,  St.  Isidore  of  Seville, 
St.  Bede,  have  tried  to  make  the  passage  of  the  Fourth  Book 
of  Ezra  credible  by  restricting  the  character  of  Ezra  within 
somewhat  narrower  bounds.  (See  Loisy,  Hist,  du  Canon  de 
r Ancient  Testament.) 

Having  brought  forth  these  preliminary  testimonies,  we 
now  proceed  to  more  closely  examine  the  question  of  Ezra's 
influence  on  the  Scripture.  Ezra  restored  the  Yahvistic 
worship,  and  promulgated  the  Law.  This  rests  on  the  clear 
testimony  of  an  inspired  book.  The  8th  and  9th  Chapters 
of  the  n.  Book  of  Ezra  firmly  establish  the  character  of  Ezra 
as  reorganizer  of  Israel  and  promulgator  of  the  Law;  but 
when  we  would  extend  his  influence  on  the  Scripture  further 
than  this,  we  are  unsustained  by  certain  data.  In  view  of 
these  facts,  it  is  well  to  first  set  forth  what  Ezra  did  not  do, 
and,  secondl}^  proceed  to  establish  the  most  reasonable 
probable  judgments  concerning  what  he  did.  We  place, 
therefore,  as  a  thesis,  that  there  are  no  adequate  data  to 
establish  that  Ezra  promulgated  an  official  list  of  the  holy 


252  EZRA 

books  of  the  Jews ;  but,  on  the  contrary,  probable  data 
seem  to  warrant  that  no  such  official  list  was  ever  promul- 
gated among  the  Jews  by  any  authority. 

To  prove  this  thesis,  we  find  one  convincing  proof  in  the 
fact  that  there  is  not  a  testimony  in  the  patrimony  of  Scrip- 
tural science  which  asserts  any  such  fact.  Men,  it  is  true, 
have  asserted  such  fact;  but  they  lacked  one  requisite  ele- 
ment of  a  faithful  witness,  knowledge  of  the  fact.  The 
Fathers  followed  the  pseudo  Ezra ;  hence  their  authority  is 
no  greater  than  his,  which  is  nothing.  The  Babba  Bathra 
of  the  Talmud,  quoted  above,  speaks  of  the  Scripture  as 
though  reduced  to  definite  list,  but  its  authority,  even  though 
believed  implicitly,  would  prove  nothing  for  the  supposed 
character  of  Ezra.  The  Baba  Bathra  does  not  antedate 
the  second  century  of  the  Christian  era,  and,  at  that  time, 
the  list  of  the  Jewish  Canon  was  complete,  not  by  definite 
authority,  but  by  the  common  consent  of  the  Jewish  people 
and  its  teachers.  The  Baba  Bathra  does  not  attribute 
the  fixing  of  the  Canon  to  Ezra,  and  no  other  document 
worthy  of  faith  does  so.  We  think  that  a  fact  of  such  im- 
portance would  not  be  passed  over  in  silence,  while  so  many 
others  of  much  less  importance  are  detailed  to  us  in  the 
books  of  Ezra,  Nehemiah,  and  the  Maccabees. 

The  Talmud  records  many  disputes  concerning  the  can- 
onicity  of  some  of  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament.  Behold 
an  example:  "Rabbi  Juda  has  said  that  the  Canticle  of 
Canticles  defiles  the  hands;  but  Ecclesiastes  is  contested.* 
Rabbi  Joseph  said :  'Ecclesiastes  does  not  defile  the  hands.' 
Rabbi  Simon  said :  The  disciples  of  Schammai  judged  more 
unfavorably  of  Ecclesiastes  than  the  disciples  of  Hillel.' 
Rabbi  Simeon,  son  of  Azai,  said:  T  have  learned  from 
every  one  of  the  mouths  of  the  seventy  ancients  that  this 
question  was  settled  when  Rabbi  Eleazar,  son  of  Azarias, 
was  installed  in  office.'  Rabbi  Akiba  said:  'May  it  please 
God,  no  Israelite  has  ever  doubted  that  the  Canticle  of  Can- 
ticles defiles  the  hands.     The  world  has  nothing  more  precious 

*To  render  the  hands  impure  was  the  rabbinic  expression  to  express 
that  a  book  was  inspired,  as  they  must  needs  wash  their  hands  after 
touching  an  inspired  book. 


EZRA  253 

than  the  day  on  which  the  Canticle  of  Canticles  was  given  to 
Israel.  All  the  Hagiographa  are  holy,  but  the  Canticle  of 
Canticles  is  most  holy.  If  discussion  has  existed,  it  was  con- 
cerning Ecclesiastes.'  Rabbi  Jochanan,  son  of  Joshua,  son  of 
the  father-in-law  of  Rabbi  Akiba,  said:  'It  was  discussed 
and  decided  as  has  said  the  son  of  Azai. '  "  (Tr.  Jadaim  III.  5 .) 
Again:  "The  doctors  wished  to  place  in  obscurity  the  Book  of 
Ecclesiastes,  for  the  reason  that  its  discourses  were  contrary  to 
the  Law.  Why  did  they  not  place  it  apart  ?  Because  it  be- 
gins and  ends  w^ith  the  words  of  the  Law."     (Tr.  Sabbath  30.) 

These  contentions  among  the  Talmudists  give  evidence  of 
doubts  concerning  various  books  of  Scripture.  If  the  Canon 
had  been  made  out  and  promulgated  by  Ezra,  would'  not  his 
authority  have  been  cited  here  to  decide  concerning  these 
books?  If,  as  our  opponents  assert,  the  fixing  of  the  Canon 
by  Ezra  rests  on  Talmudic  tradition,  we  ought  certainly  to 
hear  some  word  of  him  in  these  disputes.  On  the  contrary, 
he  is  only  mentioned  as  the  author  of  his  book  and  the  con- 
tinuator  of  Chronicles. 

The  Book  of  Ecclesiasticus,  written  very  probably  about 
the  year  180,  B.  C,  in  Chapters  XLIV.  to  XLIX.  speaks  of 
Israel's  heroes  and  sages,  and,  although  it  exhorts  that 
Nehemiah  be  a  long  time  remembered,  it  has  no  word  of 
Ezra.  This  would  seem  incomprehensible  had  Ezra  collected 
and  authoritatively  promulgated  the  Canon.  Moreover, 
Daniel  and  Esther  are  not  mentioned  among  the  illustrious 
ones  of  Israel,  and  there  seems  to  be  no  other  credible  reason 
than  that  these  books  had  not,  at  that  date,  entered  the  Jew- 
ish Canon,  and,  consequently,  were  imknown  to  the  author 
of  Ecclesiasticus. 

The  Jews  of  Palestine,  in  their  second  letter  to  their  con- 
freres of  Alexandria,  make  offer  to  send  them  the  books  that 
Nehemiah  and  Judas  had  collected :  ''And  these  same  things 
were  set  down  in  the  memoirs  and  commentaries  of  Nehemiah, 
and  how  he  made  a  library,  and  gathered  the  writings  con- 
cerning the  kings,  and  the  Prophets  and  the  (writings)  of 
David,  ra  rod  AavtS,  and  the  letters  of  the  kings  treating 
of  the  oblations.  And  in  like  manner  Judas  also  gathered 
together  all  such  things  as  were  lost  by  the  war  we  had,  and 


254  EZRA 

they  are  in  our  possession."  We  see  in  this  testimon^^  a  de- 
scription of  a  collection  of  books  of  national  importance  to 
Israel,  partly  sacred  and  partly  profane.  It  is  quite  probable 
that  the  sacred  books  therein  included  were  the  first  and  later 
Prophets,  according  to  the  Jewish  mode  of  enumeration,  and 
the  Psalms  of  David.  The  other  works  were,  doubtless, 
epistles  of  the  Persian  kings,  of  importance  in  the  govern- 
ment of  a  coimtry  now  a  vassalage  of  Persia.  It  is  plainly 
evident  that  Nehemiah  did  not  collect  the  Canon  of  Scripture 
but  a  collection  of  important  books  sacred  and  profane,  which, 
joined  to  the  later  collection  of  Judas  Maccabasus,  formed  a 
sort  of  national  library,  to  a  participation  of  which  the  Jews 
of  Palestine  invited  their  brothers  of  Alexandria.  This  testi- 
mony also  is  a  factor  to  refute  the  generally  received  opinion 
that  Ezra  closed  the  Canon.  Most  probably,  he  co-operated 
with  Nehemiah  in  this  enterprise ;  but  the  very  fact  of  a 
collection  of  certain  sacred  books  into  the  national  library 
presupposes  that  no  complete  authentic  list  of  the  Scriptures 
was  in  possession  of  Israel.  Had  it  been  made  subsequently, 
some  trace  of  it  would  have  been  left  in  the  records  of  the 
Jews.  ,  We  believe,  therefore,  that  the  opinion  which  attri- 
butes to  Ezra  the  collection  and  closing  of  the  Canon  to  be 
devoid  of  historical  basis  and  imtenable. 

We  now  pass  to  consider  what  influence  Ezra  did  exert 
upon  the  Holy  Books.  The  selection  of  him,  "a  scribe  able 
in  the  Law,"  implies  that  there  was  some  reconstruction  of 
Holy  Scripture  for  him  to  do.  We  have  before  said  that  he 
promulgated  the  Law  to  the  returned  exiles.  What  revision 
he  wrought  on  the  Thorah,  it  is  impossible  to  say,  but  we  are 
ready  to  believe  that  he  revised  in  some  respects  Israel's  great 
code.  He  also  evidently  explained  this  law  to  the  people, 
and  put  into  execution  its  enactments.  This  is  Ezra's  dis- 
tinguishing fimction  in  history.  As  reorganizer  of  Israel's 
polity,  we  are  ready  to  believe  that  he  did  collect  and  revise 
Israel's  sacred  literature,  and  that  many  books  came  under 
his  influence.  How  many,  we  can  not  say.  We  must  here 
simply  rely  on  conjecture.  But,  from  the  fact  of  the  collec- 
tion by  Nehemiah,  one  may  see  that  the  reconstructive  spirit 
of  Nehemiah  and  Ezra  tended  to  bring  together  Israel's  sacred 


EZRA  255 

deposit  of  writings.  They  did  this  without  any  ex  professo 
declaration  of  promulgating  a  canon;  and  it  is  highly  prob- 
able that  not  all  the  Holy  Books  of  the  first  Canon  were  col- 
lected into  a  body  of  writings  at  their  epoch.  Gradually  the 
sacred  collection  was  made  up,  and,  at  the  time  of  Christ,  the 
Jews  considered  the  list  of  Holy  Books  as  complete  and  fixed. 
The  nucleus  of  the  collection  was  the  Thorah.  Around  this 
centre,  the  Holy  Books  formed  themselves  into  a  recognized 
collection  by  the  concurrence  of  various  causes,  and  their 
warranty  for  entrance  into  the  sacred  collection  was  not  any 
decree  or  order  of  canonization  by  any  authority  but  the 
fact  that  their  contents  were  comformable  to  the  living  tra- 
ditions of  the  people,  and  reflected  the  things  which  a  tena- 
cious Eastern  memory  had  learned  from  law  and  prophet. 

Concerning  Daniel  the  Abbe  Glaire  declares  thus:  **It 
seems  to  me,  admitting,  as  I  also  do,  the  perfect  canon- 
icity  of  Daniel,  that  the  book  being  collected  at  Babylon, 
possibly  after  the  death  of  its  author,  it  was  later  brought  to 
Jerusalem,  and  found  place  only  at  the  end  of  the  works 
already  in  the  Canon."  (Introduction  I.  1868.) 

Ezra  may  have  revised  maAy  of  the  holy  books ;  he  may 
have  collected  all  those  attainable  at  that  time ;  we  are  ready 
to  admit  his  influence  upon  Scripture  to  have  extended  even 
to  the  correcting  of  the  Pentateuch,  but  we  deny  him  an 
official  promulgation  of  an  incomplete  canon  of  Scripture,  at 
the  very  time  when  other  books  of  divine  origin  were  in  actual 
existence,  although  not  in  his  possession.  In  the  Talmudic 
testimonies  adduced  above,  mention  is  made  of  a  great  syna- 
gogue, n^n^n  npJDr  organized  by  Ezra.  Much  that 
is  fabulous  has  been  written  concerning  this  great  synagogue. 
Many  reject  it  in  toto  as  a  rabbinic  fable.  Here  again  his- 
torical data  are  wanting.  Besides  the  Talmudic  authority 
already  quoted,  the  Jews  of  the  middle  age,  Abarbanel,  Abra- 
ham ben  David,  and  Maimonides  recount  that  the  Great 
Synagogue  was  composed  of  120  members.  Ezra  was  presi- 
dent, and  the  Prophets  Haggai,  Zachary  and  Malachi  were 
among  its  members.  It  endured  from  the  year  444,  B.C., 
down  to  the  time  of  Simon  the  Just,  about  the  year  200  of 
the  Christian  era.     The  writings  of  the  middle  age  are  char- 


256  EZRA 

acterized  by  the  same  spirit  of  extravagant  fable  which  robs 
the  Talmud  of  all  historic  worth,  hence  we  can  not  treat  these 
assertions  as  historic  data.  At  most,  there  may  be  in  them 
a  basic  thread  of  true  tradition,  which  is  well  nigh  lost  amid 
a  web  of  fable.  Even  those  who  have  credulously  accepted 
the  legend  of  Ezra's  Canon  have  rejected  the  story  of  the 
Great  Synagogue.  No  convincing  data  are  at  hand  to  estab- 
lish the  existence  of  such  a  body  organized  by  Ezra,  and  yet 
such  an  organization,  though  not  of  such  proportions  as  the 
Rabbis  assert,  may  have  been  created  by  him,.  That  a  body 
of  men  called  the  Synedrion  or  Sanhedrim  existed  at  the 
opening  of  the  Christian  era  is  not  doubted.  It  is  quite 
certain  that  Christ  referred  to  this  body  in  Math.  V.,  22: 
"But  I  say  to  you,  that  whosoever  is  angry  with  his  brother, 
shall  be  in  danger  of  the  judgment,  and  whosoever  shall  say 

to  his  brother,  J^p1#  (cerebro  vacuus),  shall  be  in  danger  of 
Itt 

the  coimcil. "  It  is  impossible  to  fix  the  date  of  origin  of  this 
assembly.  Many  Jews  refer  it  back  to  the  origin  of  their 
polity  under  Moses.  Of  course  this  is  a  vagary.  Christian 
writers  diverge  widely  in  their  opinions  concerning  it.  Noth- 
ing certain  is  available.  Without  admitting  the  fables  of  the 
Rabbis,  might  it  not  be  the  evolution  of  a  legislative  body 
organized  by  Ezra  to  aid  in  administering  the  civil  and 
religious  affairs  of  re-organized  Israel?  The  question,  like 
many  others  of  a  like  nature,  only  admits  of  a  conjectural 
answer. 

It  is  certain  that  the  Providence  of  God  entered  as  chief 
factor  in  preserving  the  Holy  Books  through  so  many  vicissi- 
tudes. He,  as  ever,  did  this  suaviter  et  fortiter.  As  he  was 
back  of  the  collection,  they  were  safe,  and  there  is  no  need 
of  bringing  the  unsubstantial  legend  of  Ezra's  Canon  to  pro- 
tect a  collection  of  books  which  the  Providence  of  God  pro- 
tected in  his  own  way.  But  in  the  accessions  to  the  central 
nucleus  of  the  Jewish  Canon,  after  the  fourth  century,  a 
distinction  was  made,  whence  has  sprung  a  leading  question 
in  the  history  of  the  Canon.  Malachi  closes  the  series  of  the 
Hebrew  prophets.  Nothing  certain  is  known  of  the  identity 
of  this  prophet.  Some  have  believed  the  Hebrew  name 
*'pi^/'D  (angelus  meus)  to  be  an  appellative  of  Ezra,  or  of 


EZRA  257 

another  Jew  of  that  period,  designating  the  particular  func- 
tion of  the  last  of  the  Prophets.  Cornely  sustains  by  prob- 
able arguments,  that  Malachi  is  the  proper  name  of  an  in- 
dividual. The  Jews  recognized  in  him  the  last  of  the  Pro- 
phets, and  termed  him  DHin  D^^DJil  (sigillum  Prophet- 
arum).  Whatever  view  we  adopt,  Malachi's  period  must 
have  been  about  four  himdred  years  B.C.  The  accessions 
to  the  Palestinian  Canon  subsequent  to  Malachi  were  ac- 
corded a  secondary  rank.  They  were  by  no  means  con- 
sidered as  mere  profane  creations,  but  from  the  fact  that  the 
series  of  the  Prophets  was  closed,  the  effusion  of  the  Holy 
Ghost  was  not  believed  to  be  so  directly  reflected  in  these 
books  as  in  the  others.  This  secondary  influence  of  the 
Holy  Ghost  they  denominated  the  ^)p  HS  (filia  vocis).    We 

find  in  no  place  an  explicit  enumeration  of  the  several  books 
whose  writers  were  supposed  to  be  actuated  by  the  bath  kol, 
but  all  indications  seem  to  evince  that  they  were  the  deu- 
terocanonical  works  of  the  Old  Testament. 

From  the  first,  these  books  existed  in  the  Alexandrian 
Canon,  which  was  totally  derived  from  the  sacred  books  of 
the  Jews  of  Palestine,  and  the  celebrated  testimony  of  Flav- 
ins Josephus,  now  to  be  adduced,  clearly  asserts  the  exist- 
ence and  preservation  of  certain  semi-divine  books,  which 
had  been  collected  after  the  close  of  prophecy  in  the  reign 
of  Artaxerxes.  Now  these  books  can  be  naught  else  than 
the  deuterocanonical  books  of  the  Old  Testament.  The 
testimony  of  Josephus  exists  in  his  "Defense  Against  Apion/' 
Bk.  I.,  Parag.  8:  "For  we  have  not  an  innumerable  multi- 
tude of  books  disagreeing  from  and  contradicting  one  another, 
as  the  Greeks  have,  but  only  twenty-two  books,  which  con- 
tain the  records  of  all  the  past  times,  which  are  justly  be- 
lieved to  be  divine.  And  of  them,  five  belong  to  Moses, 
which  contain  his  laws  and  the  traditions  of  the  origin  of 
mankind  till  his  death.  This  interval  of  time  embraces 
nearly  three  thousand  years.  From  the  death  of  Moses  to 
the  reign  of  Artaxerxes,  who  reigned  after  Xerxes,  the 
Prophets  who  were  after  Moses  wrote  down  what  was  done 
in  their  times  in  thirteen  books.  The  remaining  four  books 
contain  hymns  to  God    and    precepts  for  the   conduct   of 

(17)  H.  S. 


258  EZRA 

human  life.  It  is  true,  our  history  hath  been  writtten  since 
Artaxerxes  very  particularly,  but  hath  not  been  esteemed  of  the 
like  authority  with  the  former  by  our  forefathers,  because  there 
hath  not  been  an  exact  succession  of  Prophets  since  that  time: 
and  how  firmly  we  have  given  credit  to  these  books  of  our 
own  nation,  is  evident  by  what  we  do ;  for  during  so  many 
ages  as  have  already  passed,  no  one  hath  been  so  bold  as 
either  to  add  anything  to  them,  or  take  anything  from 
them,  or  make  any  change  in  them ;  but  it  is  become  natural 
to  all  Jews,  immediately  and  from  their  very  birth,  to  esteem 
these  books  to  contain  divine  doctrines,  and  to  persist  in 
them  and,  if  occasion  be,  willingly  to  die  for  them." 

Although  some  of  the  deuterocanonical  books  contain  his- 
tory that  must  have  antedated  Artaxerxes,  nevertheless,  as 
the  date  of  their  accession  to  the  Hebrew  Canon  was  subse- 
quent to  Artaxerxes,  Josephus  confounds  the  date  of  their 
accession  with  the  date  of  their  origin.  These  books,  then, 
existed  in  the  Palestinian  collection  as  secondarily  divine 
books.  The  Talmuds  of  Jerusalem  and  Babylon  contain 
quotations  from  Ecclesiasticus.  Josephus,  who  was  an  apt 
expounder  of  Pharisaic  traditions,  makes  use  of  the  deu- 
terocanonical fragments  of  Esther  and  the  second  book  of 
Maccabees. 

Eusebius  (Eccl.  Hist.  VI.  25)  gives  us  the  Canon 
of  Scriptures  according  to  Origen.  After  enumerating 
the  protocanonical  works,  he  says:  'There  are  also 
the  Maccabees  which  are  inscribed  Sarbeth  Sarbaneel^ 
St.  Hilary  in  Prol.  in  Psalter,  testifies  that  Tobias  was  read 
among  the  Hagiographa  of  the  Jews.  St.  Epiphanius,  Haer. 
VIII.  No.  6,  testifies  that  Wisdom  and  Ecclesiasticus  were  in 
honor  among  the  Jews,  and  distinguished  from  the  apoc- 
ryphal works.  St.  Isidore  says  of  Wisdom:  "As  a  certain 
one  of  those  who  know  has  recorded,  the  Hebrews  received 
this  work  (Wisdom)  among  the  Canonical  Scriptures.  But 
after  they  had  seized  and  killed  the  Christ,  remembering  the 
most  evident  testimonies  concerning  Christ  in  that  same 
book,  in  which  it  is  written:  The  impious  said  among 
themselves,  'let  us  seize  the  just,'  etc.,  taking  counsel,  lest 
we  might  lay  upon  them  such  an  evident  sacrilege,  they  cut 


THE   ALEXANDRIAN   CANON  259 

it  off  from  the  prophetic  volumes,  and  prohibited  its  reading 
to  their  people."  The  Apostolical  Constitutions  testify 
that  Baruch  was  read  in  the  Jewish  synagogues.*  St. 
Jerome  testifies  in  his  preface  to  the  book  of  Judith  that 
among  the  Hebrews  Judith  is  read  ''among  the  Hagio- 
grapha."  'Its  authority,"  he  continues,  "is  considered  less 
apt  to  decide  things  about  which  there  is  dispute.  It  is 
written  in  Chaldaic,  and  reckoned  among  the  historical 
books."  We  think  it  to  be  a  position  admitting  of  no  rea- 
sonable doubt  that  the  deuterocanonical  works  of  the  Old 
Testament  primarily  existed  in  the  collection  of  the  Jews  of 
Palestine.  The  narrow,  nugatory,  reactionary  spirit  of 
the  latter  day  Jews,  exemplified  in  the  Pharisees,  denied  to 
these  books  canonicity,  as  we  understand  the  term ;  but  we 
can  find  no  evidence  that  they  denied  them  a  divine  origin. 
They  are  not  found  in  the  Hebrew  collection  of  books  to-day, 
but  this  can  be  readily  explained.  The  same  spirit  which 
moved  the  Jews  of  Palestine  to  deny  these  books  equal  rank 
with  the  others,  impelled  them  later  to  entirely  exclude 
them.  It  would  be  hard  to  fix  the  date  of  this  exclusion. 
It  is  probable  that  they  gradually  died  out  of  the  different 
codices,  till,  at  last,  all  trace  of  them  disappeared  in  the 
Palestinian  Canon. 

Chapter  VI. 
The  Alexandrian  Canon. 

Opposite  causes  effected  the  preservation  of  these  books 
in  the  Alexandrian  Canon.  The  Jews  of  Egypt  depended 
in  matters  of  religion  on  the  Jews  of  Palestine.  Abundant 
data  prove  that  they  received  their  collection  of  Holy  Books 
from  Palestine.  This  was  not  accomplished  all  at  once.  It 
began  with  the  translation  of  the  Law,  made  under  Ptolemy 
Philadelphus  in  the  third  century  B.C.,  and  continued 
down  to  the  first   century   B.C.     The  influence   of  Greek 

*The  Constitutions  of  The  Holy  Apostles  are  a  composite  work,  some 
of  which  may  be  as  early  as  the  second  century  of  the  Christian  era.  It 
seems  quite  probable  that  they  originated  in  Syria.  The  only  relation 
that  they  bear  to  the  Apostles  is  that  they  reflect  the  Apostolical  tra- 
ditions of  the  times.  They  were  declared  apocryphal  by  the  decree  of 
Gelasius,  but  still  are  of  value  inasmuch  as  they  preserve  for  us  the  tra- 
ditions of  the  first  ages  of  Christianity. 


260  THE   ALEXANDRIAN   CANON 

thought  and  customs  on  the  Hellenistic  Jews  modified  the 
narrow  national  spirit  of  that  nation.     Later,  in  the  time 
of  the  Maccabees,  the  pagan  Greek  customs  were  readily 
adopted  by  the  Jewish  youth.     This  liberal  trend  of  religious 
thought  effected  that  the  deuterocanonical  books  were  re- 
ceived and  intermingled  promiscuously  with  the  other  hooks. 
It  is  quite  probable  that  there  was  always  a  certain  degree 
of  uncertainty  and  indecision  in  the  synagogues  of  Alexan- 
dria.    The  minute,  sharply    drawn,  Pharisaic  distinctions 
did  not  obtain  there.     They  had  left  home  and  home  tradi- 
tions, and,  blending  with  a  highly  cultivated  nation,  even 
those  who  clung  to  the  substance  of  the  Mosaic  covenant 
lost  much  of  their  conservative  spirit.     As  they  read  the 
Scriptures  in  Greek,  the  deuterocanonical  books  were  not 
distinguishable  by  difference  of  tongue  from  the  books  of  the 
first  Canon.     On  the  contrary,  in  Palestine  the  Scriptures 
were    inseparably  cast  in  the  mould  of  the  Hebrew  mother 
tongue.     The  strong  love  of  the  Hebrews  for  their  mother 
tongue  would  naturally  incline  the  Jews  of  Palestine  to 
look  with  less  favor  on  a  sacred  book  not  written  in  the 
Hebrew  language.    Now    some    of   the    deuterocanonical 
books,  such  as  Wisdom  and  H.  Maccabees,  were  of  Greek 
origin.     It  is  quite  probable  that  some  of  the  others  were 
already  translated  into  Greek  before  their  aggregation  to  the 
sacred  collection,  hence  is  explained  their  secondary  place 
among  the  sacred  books,  and  also  why  they  are  not  found  in 
the  Hebrew  Canon  of  to-day.     It  seems  also  quite  certain 
that  the  Hellenistic  Jews  made  no  distinction  between  the 
protocanonical  and  the  deuterocanonical  books.     Had  such 
distinction  been  made,  the  books  of  secondary  importance 
would  have  been  relegated  to  the  end  of  the  collection. 
Now  the  direct  opposite  is  found  to  have  prevailed.     Pro- 
tocanonical and  deuterocanonical  works   are  indiscrimin- 
ately intermingled  in  the  Alexandrian  Canon.     This  indis- 
criminate adoption  of  the  deuterocanonical  books  was  not 
the  canonizing  of  these  by  the  Alexandrians.     It  was  a  mere 
fact,  which  its  authors  had  never  taken  thought  to  explain. 
Had  they  formally  rendered  equal  these  various  books  by  an 
explicit  declaration,  it  would  have  led  to  controversy  between 


THE   ALEXANDRIAN  CANON  261 

the  Hellenists  and  the  Jews  of  Palestine.  No  trace  of  any 
such  controversy  is  found  in  the  records  and  traditions  of 
antiquit}^  The  Jews  of  Palestine  were  not  hostile  to  the 
deuterocanonical  works,  but,  from  the  causes  alread}^  enu- 
merated, refused  to  accord  them  equal  rank  with  the  others. 
The  Jews  of  Alexandria,  without  deciding  the  issue,  received 
and  revered  them  all,  and  intermingled  them  in  the  sacred 
collection. 

There  is  plainly  evident  in  this  fact  the  workings  of  the 
Providence  of  God.     The  Almighty  had  decreed  to  effect  the 
transition  from  the  old  to  the  new  covenant  through  the 
medium  of  Greek  language  and  culture.     Israel  was  to  re- 
ceive the  Christ  in  fulfillment  of  Yahveh's  promises,  but  the 
great  Gentile  world  was  to  be  the  chosen  people  of  the  New 
Covenant.     Under  the  Providence  of  God,  Alexander  the 
Great  brought  the  known  world  under  Greek  influence,  and 
gave  it  the  Greek  language  as  the  medium  of  thought.     The 
Romans  reduced  this  vast  extent  of  territory  to  peace  with- 
out changing  the  language.     Thus  two  conditions  favor- 
able for  the  evangelization  of  the  world  were  accomplished, 
peace  and  a  uniform  adequate  vehicle  of  thought.     It  is 
easy  to  see  how  these  two  factors  aided  in  the  spread  of  the 
Gospel.     Now,  it  was  also  expedient  that  the  existing  Scrip- 
tures should  be  in  the  universal  tongue  of  the  civilized  world. 
We  can  see  how  the  teachers  of  the  New  Covenant  availed 
themselves  of  this  element,  since,  with  a  few  exceptions,  they 
always  make  use  of  the  Greek  text  of  Scripture  when  quoting 
the  Old  Testament.     Hence,  the  Providence  of  God  brought 
it  about  that  in  the  Greek  there  should  exist  a  complete  body 
of  Scriptures.     God  was  less  solicitous  about  the  Palestinian 
collection,  because  that  was  not  to  be  the  medium  of  graft- 
ing the  new  scion  on  the  old  stock.     Thus  the  Alexandrians 
were  instrimients  in  the  hands  of  God  in  collecting  a  com- 
plete body  of  Scriptures,  which  that  same  Providence  has 
ever  protected  as  the  great  basic  element  in  the  deposit  of 
faith.     The  first  virtual  canonization  of  the  deuterocanonical 
books  was  the  approbation  of  the  Alexandrian  collection  of 
books  by  the  teachers  of  the  New^  Law. 


262  THE  ALEXANDRIAN   CANON 

We  have  hitherto  assumed  that  the  deuterocanonical 
books  were  indiscriminately  intermingled  with  the  other 
books  in  the  Alexandrian  collection.  That  we  may  not  be 
thought  to  assume  unproven  things,  we  shall  adduce  a  few 
proofs  of  this  well  warranted  fact.  In  the  first  place,  we 
may  remark  that  the  only  ones  who  would  be  likely  to  deny 
this  would  be  the  protestants.  Now  Davidson,  a  protestant, 
in  his  Canon  of  the  Bible  admits  this  as  an  obvious  fact. 
**The  very  way,"  he  says,  "in  which  apocryphal  (deutero- 
canonical) are  inserted  among  canonical  books  in  the  Alex- 
andrian Canon  shows  the  equal  rank  assigned  to  both." 
We  may  consider  a  first  proof,  the  presence  of  these  books  in 
the  Christian  Canon  of  the  first  ages.  Now  certainly  they 
received  their  collection  of  the  Old  Testament  from  the 
Greek  Canon.  Though  the  codices  whence  they  took  their 
Canon  have  perished,  yet  the  exemplars  now  existing  were 
faithfully  reproduced  from  them.  The  translation  known  as 
the  Vetus  Itala,  which  dates  back  to  the  2nd  century  of  the 
Christian  era,  had  all  the  deuterocanonical  works,  and  this 
was  certainly  made  from  the  Alexandrian  collection.  The 
great  codices  of  the  Vatican  and  Mt.  Sinai,  going  back  prob- 
ably to  the  fourth  century,  contain  these  works.  The  early 
Fathers  were  as  conversant  with  the  deuterocanonical 
works  as  with  the  rest  of  Holy  Scripture.  The  subjects  of 
the  art  of  the  Catacombs  are  largely  taken  from  the  deu- 
terocanonical works.  Such  early  and  universal  approba- 
tion could  not  be  effected,  had  not  these  books  been  delivered 
to  the  Christian  Church  by  the  Old  Covenant  through  the 
medium  of  the  Greek. 

It  should  not  appear  strange  that  all  our  attention  is 
now  centering  upon  the  deuterocanonical  books.  This  is 
the  great  issue  between  the  protestants  and  us.  The  pro- 
tocanonical  works  need  no  defense,  except  against  the 
rationalists.  Our  defense  against  them  will  appear  later  in 
our  work.  Those  who  reject  the  protocanonical  works 
attack  the  whole  basis  of  religious  belief.  But  those  who 
reject  the  deuterocanonical  works  profess  still  to  accept 
God's  word  to  man.  With  them,  is  the  first  issue.  We  shall 
first  endeavor  to  prove  that  the  writers  of  the  New  Law,  by 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  CHURCH  263 

accepting  and  employing  the  Alexandrian  text  of  Holy 
Scripture,  in  which  were  the  deuterocanonical  books,  virtu- 
ally canonized  that  collection  of  Scriptures. 

Chapter  VII. 

The  Canon  of  the  Church. 

There  is  no  trace  in  writing  or  tradition  of  any  formal 
decision  rendered  by  Jesus  Christ  or  his  Apostles  concerning 
the  Canon  of  the  Old  Testament.  However,  their  use  of  the 
Alexandrian  text  of  Scripture  is  equivalent  to  an  express 
decree.  It  were  incompatible  with  the  character  of  the 
teachers  of  mankind  and  organizers  of  the  Church,  to  make 
use  of  a  collection  of  Scripture  in  which  profane  and  inspired 
books  were  commingled.  That  they  formulated  no  de- 
cree concerning  the  Canon  of  Scripture,  proves  that  the  Scrip- 
tures are  subordinate  to  the  Church.  They,  in  virtue  of 
the  power  given  by  the  Master,  were  to  found  a  living 
teaching  body.  The  institutions  of  men  exist  by  force 
of  the  fixed  decrees  and  constitutions  upon  which  their 
stability  is  based.  The  institution  of  Christ  exists  by 
virtue  of  the  perpetual  living  vigor  that  energizes  within 
her.  She  may  pay  small  heed  to  human  enactments, 
even  though  of  infallible  agents,  for  her  warranty  is  in 
her  living  constitution,  which  is  the  almighty  power 
of  the  Holy  Ghost,  her  vital  principle.  Hence  the  Scrip- 
tures are  only  an  instrument  in  the  hands  of  the  Church. 
Christ  and  his  Apostles  foimded  the  teaching  body,  which 
should  guard  the  Scriptures,  and  at  the  proper  time  fix  the 
Canon.  In  all  our  investigations  concerning  the  Canon,  it  is 
the  authority  of  the  Church  in  the  background  which  forms 
the  great  complement  of  the  motive  of  credibility.  No 
man  can  go  securely  through  the  dim  vista  of  those  remote 
times  without  the  beacon  hght  of  the  Church.  It  is  not  by 
the  sole  force  of  historical  data,  that  we  believe  that  the  deu- 
terocanonical works  have  God  for  their  author.  We  receive 
them  on  the  authority  of  the  Church,  and  then  trace  the 
conformity  between  the  books'  history  and  the  dogma  of 
the  Church.  A  man  would  defeat  his  own  purpose,  should 
he  attempt  to  convert  one  to  Catholicity  by  proving  that  the 


264  THE  CANON  OF  THE  CHURCH 

deuterocanonical  works  had  equal  title  to  canonicity.  Prove 
first  that  there  is  a  God;  then  that  there  is  a  Christ;  then 
that  there  is  a  Church ;  and  lastly  exhort  him  to  humbly  ask 
Christ's  teacher  what  to  believe. 

St.  Jerome  after  much  hedging  was  forced  to  admit  that 
the  Alexandrian  collection  was  approved  by  the  Apostles. 
He  would,  indeed,  have  us  believe  that,  where  the  Septua- 
gint  differed  from  the  Hebrew,  the  Apostles  made  use  of  the 
Hebrew.  This  is  contradicted  by  the  other  Fathers,  and  is 
disproven  by  an  examination  and  comparison  of  the  two 
texts.  St.  Irenseus'  authority  is  explicit  in  favor  of  our 
thesis.  "The  Apostles,  being  older  than  all  these,  (Aquila 
and  the  other  Greek  interpreters)  are  in  accord  with  the 
aforesaid  (Septuagint)  translation,  and  the  translation  cor- 
responds with  the  tradition  of  the  Apostles.  For  Peter  and 
John  and  Matthew  and  Paul  and  the  others  and  their  fol- 
lowers announced  the  prophetic  things  according  to  the 
Septuagint.''  [Contra  Haer.  III.  21,  3.]  Origin  testifies  that 
Paul,  in  Epist.  to  Romans,  follows  the  Septuagint  in  every- 
thing, except,  perchance,  things  of  minor  moment.  [Orig. 
in  Rom.  VHI.  6.]  The  Syrian  Jacobites,  by  the  testimony 
of  their  primate  Barhebrseus  preferred  the  Syrian  version 
of  Scripture,  that  had  been  made  from  the  Septuagint  to 
the  earlier  one  made  from  the  Hebrew,  because  the  one 
made  from  the  Septuagint  was  more  in  consonance  with  the 
discourses  of  Our  Lord  and  his  Apostles. 

From  the  sixteenth  century  down,  critical  collation  has 
been  made  of  the  passages  of  the  Old  Testament,  quoted  in 
the  New.  From  the  labors  of  Serarius,  Morini,  Capelli, 
Kautzsch,  and  others,  it  results  that,  of  three  hundred  and 
fifty  passages  of  the  Old  Testament  quoted  in  the  New,  more 
than  three  hundred  so  agree  with  the  Septuagint  that  it  is 
evident  that  the  writer  was  using  that  text  as  a  source.  Sts. 
Peter,  James,  Mark,  Luke,  and  the  writer  of  the  Epistle  to 
the  Hebrews  always  quote  from  the  Septuagint;  St.  Paul, 
almost  always;  and  Sts.  Matthew  and  John  very  often  quote 
from  it.  The  reason  for  such  course  of  action  is  evident. 
They  were  to  convert  a  Greek  world.  By  the  Providence  of 
God,  a  version  of  Scripture  existed  in  Greek.     They  were 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  CHURCH  265 

but  following  out  the  great  plan  of  Salvation,  by  employing 
the  resources  of  this  existing  text  of  Scripture  in  the  evan- 
gelization of  the  world.  Had  such  text  been  interspersed 
with  spurious  books  and  fragments  such  line  of  action 
would  ill  fit  the  teachers  of  the  world.  Our  adversaries  en- 
deavor to  enfeeble  the  force  of  this  argument  by  alleging 
that  no  deuterocanonical  books  of  the  Old  Testament  is 
expressly  quoted  in  the  New.  This  fact  we  admit ;  but  we 
deny  that  it  weakens  our  position.  Davidson,  in  Canon  of 
the  Bible,  though  not  in  the  least  friendly  to  Catholic  opin- 
ions rejects  this  argument  against  the  deuterocanonical 
books.  On  page  77 :  ''When  Bishop  Cosius  says  that  in  all 
the  New  Testament  we  find  no  passage  of  apocryphal  (deu- 
terocanonical) books  to  have  been  alleged  either  by  Christ 
or  his  Apostles  for  the  confirmation  of  His  doctrine,  the  argu- 
ment, though  based  on  a  fact,  is  scarcely  conclusive;  else, 
Esther,  Canticles,  and  other  works  might  be  equally  dis- 
credited." In  the  New  Testament  Obadiah,  Nahum,  the 
Canticle  of  Canticles,  Ecclesiastes,  Esther,  Ezra  and  Nehe- 
miah  are  neither  quoted  from  nor  alluded  to.  It  needs  not  an 
explicit  quotation  to  approve  a  book.  The  approbation  of 
the  version  which  recognized  these  books  was  a  sufficient 
warranty  for  their  inspiration.  Express  quotations  in  the 
New  Testament  are  generally  taken  from  the  Law  or  the 
Prophets ;  the  other  books  are  more  oft  implicitly  cited,  and 
it  is  only  by  the  general  similarity  between  the  passages  that 
we  may  detect  that  the  writer  of  the  New  Testament  had 
in  mind  any  particular  book  of  the  Old  Testament.  Now 
there  are  many  passages  in  the  New  Testament,  which, 
when  closely  examined,  bear  evidence  that  the  writer  had  in 
mind  some  book  of  the  deuterocanonical  collection.  As  this 
identity  of  thought  appears  to  better  advantage  from  the 
Greek,  we  collate  a  few  texts  in  that  tongue. 

2o9taS£tpax.  x£9.  E.  11  'Ia/.w6ou  'ExigtoXtq  x£9.  A'. 

Ftvou    Ta^uq    ev    dxpoacst  aou,  l^- — ^'^"^^  ^^  xa<;  ^fvOpwxoc;  xa- 

xac   ev  ii.axpo0u^ia  c^U-^^ou   axo-  X"^?  st?  xb  axoucrat,  gpaSuc;  stq  ih 

xptffiv.  XaXfjaat,  ppaBu<;  etq  dpyi^v. 


266 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH 


Ecclesiasticus  V.  ii.  Jas.  I.   19. 

Esto  velox  in  auscultatione  Sit  omnis  homo  velox  ad  au- 

tua,  et  in  longanimitate  profer  diendum,  tardus  ad  loquendum 

responsum.  tardus  ad  iram. 

So<p(a  Sstpox  xeqj.  KH'.  2.  'Euay.  xaxoc   MaT0.  VI.    14. 

"Atpsq  aBfxTQpia  tw  xXiQfffov  aou,  'Eocv  yap  d^YJTs   Tot<;  avOpwxoi? 

xal  t6t£  BeifjOlvTOc;  aoj  ai  a^jiapTtai  toc  xapaxTW^axa  auTwv,  d^iQffst  xal 

aou  XuOijaovTat.  u^tv  6  xaxrjp  ujjlwv  6  oupdvio?. 


Eccli.  XXVIII.  2. 

Remitte  injuriam  proximo 
tuo,  et  tunc  deprecanti  tibi  pec- 
cata  solventur. 

So^fa  SaXwjAwv  xe^.  V.  5,  6. 
Kal  dXtya  xatBsuOsvTS?  pLsydXa 

£U£py£TTj0TQaovTai,  OTi  6  Sehq 
£X£(pa(7£v  auTOuq  xal  £up£v  d^iouq 
lauToD,  ox;  xp^^ov  Iv  xii)\eun]gi(^ 
£Box.'!iJLaa£v  auTOU<;,  xal  ox;  oXoxdp- 
xwjjia  Ouataq  xpoa£Be?aTO  auTOU*;. 


Wisdom  III.  5-6. 

Et  in  paucis  vexati ,  in  multis 
bene  disponentur.  Quoniam 
Deus  tentavit  eos,  et  invenit 
eos  dignos  se.  Tamquam  au- 
rum  in  fornace  probavit  eos; 
quasi  holocausti  hostiam  ac- 
cepit  illos. 


Math.  VI.  14. 

Nam  si  dimiseritis  hominibus 
deHcta  sua,  dimittet  et  vobis 
pater  vester  coelestis, 

niTpou  A.  x£9.  A.  6 — 7. 

*Ev  ^  tkyockXiacbe  dXtyov  apTt 
d  8£ov  XuxT]8£VT£<;  h  xoixiXotq 
x£ip_aj;jLoI<;,  Yva  ih  Boxcjaiov  ujjlwv 
TY)(;  xfaT£(«)(;  xoXu  TipitwTEpov  XP^" 
aou  Tou  dxoXXu^JLEvou  Sid  xupb^ 
SI  ooxijJLa^ojjLEVou  £up£0"n  zlc,  £xat- 
vov  xal  B65av  xal  Tt^JLYjv  Iv  dxoxa- 
Xut}^£t  'Iirjaou  XpiaTOU. 

I  Pet.  I.  6-7. 

In  quo  exultatis,  nunc  ad 
breve  tempus  afflicti  variis  ten- 
tationibus,  si  opus  sit:  ut  pro- 
batio  fidei  vestrae  multo  pre- 
tiosior  auro  quod  perditur,  et 
tamen  per  ignem  probatur,  re- 
periatur  in  laudem  et  gloriam 
et  honorem  in  revelatione  Jesu 
Christi. 


K£9.  Z'.  26. 

'Axauyaa^jLa      ydp    hzi    90)Tb? 
d'iBtou     xal   laoxTpov   dxYjXfSwTOV 

Tfj?   TOU    0£OU    IvEpYEtaq   Xal    £tX03V 

TT^q  dYaOoTTQToq  auTou. 


Uphq  'E6patou<;  x£9.  A'.  3. 

"^Oq  wv  dxauyaa^a  tyji;  Bo^rjq 
xai  x(xpQ^%z^g  TYJq  uxoaTda£0)<; 
auTou,  xtX. 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  CHURCH  267 

Ibidem  VII.  26.  Epist.  ad  Hebraeos  I.  3. 

Etenim  lucis  aetemae  splen-  Qui  quum  sit  splendor  glorias 

dor  est,  at  que  speculum  virtu  tis  et  impressa  imago  substantias 

Dei    nulla    macula   aspersum,  illius,  etc. 
ejusque  imago  bonitatis. 

Many  more  texts  of  this  character  may  be  collected  from 
a  comparison  of  the  deuterocanonical  books  with  the  New 
Testament.  See  Huet,  Demonst.  Evang.  Prop.  IV.  and 
Vincenzi,  Sessio  IV.  Cone.  Trid.  Vindicata. 

The  Fathers  of  the  Church  continued  the  approbation  of 
the  Apostles,  and  made  no  distinction  in  their  frequent  cita- 
tions from  Scripture  between  protocanonical  and  deutero- 
canonical works.  None  of  the  Apostolical  Fathers  has 
drawTi  up  a  Canon  of  Scripture.  The  injury  of  time  has 
robbed  us  of  much  of  their  writings,  but,  in  the  few  preserved 
to  us,  most  frequent  passages  are  found  from  the  deutero- 
canonical works,  of  such  mode  of  quotation  that  it  is  evident 
that  they  recognized  these  books  as  divine  Scripture.  St. 
Clement  of  Rome,  who  holds  a  high  place  in  the  primitive 
church,  in  his  Epist.  to  the  Corinthians,  employs  the  book  of 
Wisdom  and  Ecclesiasticus.  He  made  an  analysis  of  the 
book  of  Judith  and  the  Greek  version  of  Esther  with  its 
deuterocanonical  fragments.* 

His  use  of  the  deuterocanonical  books  may  be  seen  from 
a  comparison  of  the  following  collated  passages : 
Sap.  IV.  24.  Clem.  I.  ad  Cor.  III. 

*  *  Invidia  autem  diaboli  mors  * '  Sed  secundum  pravas  ipsius 
introivit  in  orbem  terrarum. "        concupiscentias     incedit,     ini- 

quam  et  impiam  invidiam  re- 
sumendo  per  quam  et  mors  in 
mundum  intravit." 
Sap.  XL  22.  Clem.  I.  Cor.  XXVII. 

*' Virtu ti  brachii  tui  quis  re-  "Quis  resistet  virtuti  fortitu- 
sistet?"  dinis  ejus?" 

♦St.  Clement  of  Rome,  was  a  disciple  of  St.  Peter,  from  whom,  accord- 
ing to  Tertullian,  he  received  ordination.  He  succeeded  Anacletus  in 
the  Roman  See  in  the  year  91  of  the  Christian  Era.  He  is  mentioued  by 
St.  Paul  in  the  Epist.  to  the  Philippians.  His  death  is  placed  about  the 
year  100.  Although  some  have  controverted  his  martrydom,  he  is  placed 
among  the  martyrs  in  the  Canon  of  the  Mass. 


268 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH 


Sap.  XII.  12. 

"Quis  enim  dicet  tibi:  Quid 
fecisti?" 

Judith  VIII.  30,  et  seqq. 


Esther  V.,  XIV.,  XV.  et  seqq? 


Ibid. 

"Quis  dicet  ei:  Quid  fecisti?" 


Clem.  I.  Cor.  LV. 

"Beata  Judith,  cum  urbs  ob- 
sideretur,  rogavit  seniores  ut 
sibi  liceret  in  alienigenarum 
castra  transire,  ac  seipsam  peri- 
culo  tradens  propter  caritatem 
patriae  populique  obsessi  e- 
gressa  est;  et  Dominus  tradidit 
Olophernem  in  manu  feminae. 

Nee  minus  perfecta  secun- 
dum fidem  Esther  periculo  se 
objecit." 


Among  the  genuine  works  of  Clement  of  Rome  are,  by 
some,  reckoned  the  two  Epistolae  ad  Virgines.* 


Ecclesiasticus  V.  14. 

"Si  est  tibi  intellectus,  re- 
sponde  proximo;  sin  autem,  sit 
manus  tua  super  os  tuum." 

Ecclesiasticus  IX.  8 

"Averte  faciem  tuam  a  mul- 
iere  compta,  et  ne  circumspicias 
speciem  alienam.  Propter  spec- 
iem  mulieris  multi  perierunt, 
et  ex  hac  concupiscentia  quasi 
ignis  exardescit" 

Ibid  12. 

"Cum  aliena  muliere  ne  sedas 
omnino,  nee  accumbas  cum  ea, 
super  cubitum 


Clem.  I.  adVirg.  XI. 

**Si  est  tibi  intellectus,  re- 
sponde  proximo;  sin  autem,  sit 
manus  tua  super  os  tuum." 

Clem.  II.  ad  Virg.  XIII. 

"Ne  circumspicias  speciem 
alienam.  Propter  speciem  muli- 
eris multi  perierunt." 


Clem.  Ibid. 

"Cum  muliere  aliena  ne  sed- 
eas  omnino." 


*Funk  in  his  Patr.  Apost.  rejects  the  genuinity  of  these  two  Epis- 
tles, but  his  chief  argument  is  that  in  them  the  texts  from  Scripture  are 
more  literally  quoted  than  in  the  Epist.  ad  Corinthios.  Beelen  and  others 
have  defended  the  authenticity  of  these  Epistles,  and  we  see  no  reason 
why  a  sane  criticism  should  reject  them.  They  have  come  down  to  us 
through  the  Syriac,  and  have  been  translated  into  Latin  by  Wetstein, 
and  later  by  Villecourt. 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH 


269 


Clement  Ibid. 

"Cum  saltatrice  ne  assiduus 
sis,  nee  audias  illam,  ne  pereas 
in  efficacia  illius." 

Ibid.  XIII. 

"Nonne  ex  iisdem  Scripturis 
notum  tibi  est  quid,  ad  tempora 
Susannae,  narretur  de  senibus 
illis  qui,  cum  frequenter  starent 
inter  mulieres,  contemplati 
pulchritudinem  alienam,  in 
concupiscentiae  barathrum 

praecipites  sese  dederunt.  Cas- 
titatis  quidem  pretium  nover- 
unt,  sed  ipsius  jugum  fregerunt. 
Hinc  appetitui  perverse  ven- 
umdati,  in  beatam  Susannam 
conspirarunt  ut  earn  constupra- 
rent.  At  ilia  turpe  ipsorum 
desiderium  frustrata  est.  In- 
nocentiae  suae  testem  invoca- 
vit  Deum,  qui  de  manibus  im- 
piorum  senum  eam  liberavit.'' 

The  document  of  the  first  century,  commonly  known  as 
the  Epistle  of  St.  Barnabas,  also  employs  the  deuterocanoni- 
cal  books* 


Ibid.  IX.  4. 

"Cum  saltatrice  ne  assiduus 
sis,  nee  audias  illam,  ne  forte 
pereas  in  efficacia  illius." 

Dan.  XIII.  8. 

"Et  videbant  eam  senes  quo- 
tidie  ingredientem,  et  deambu- 
lantem:  et  exarserunt  in  con- 
cupiscentiam  ejus." 

Ibid.  42 — 44. 

"Exclamavit  autem  voce 
magna  Susanna,  et  dixit:  Deus 
aeterne,  qui  absconditorum  es 
cognitor,  qui  nosti  omnia  ante- 
quam  fiant,  tu  scis  quoniam  fal- 
sum  testimonium  tulerunt  con- 
tra me:  et  ecce  morior,  cum 
nihil  horum  fecerim,  quae  isti 
malitiose  composuerunt  ad- 
versum  me.  Exaudivit  autem 
Dominus  vocem  ejus." 


Ecclesiasticus  IV.   36. 

"Non  sit  porrecta  manus 
tua  ad  accipiendum  et  ad  dan- 
dum  collect  a. " 


Epist.  S.  Barnabae  XIX.  19. 

"Noli  porrigere  manus  tuas 
ad  accipiendum,  ad  dandum 
vero    contrahere. " 


The  Pastor  of  Hermas,  a  document  that  goes  back  to  the 
ist  or  2d  century,  makes  use  of  deuterocanonical  works.  It 
is  impossible  to  fix  the  identity  of  the  author  of  the  Pastor. 
Some  believed  him  to  be  the  Hermas  mentioned  by  Paul  to 

*St.  Barnabas  was  a  Cyprian  Jew  of  the  tribe  of  Levi.  Having  em- 
braced Christianity,  he  was  associated  with  Paul  in  the  Evangelization  of 
the  Gentiles.  Tradition  places  his  death  to  have  occurred  in  Cyprus,  at 
the  hands  of  the  Jews.  Tillemont  and  others  have  rejected  the  genuine- 
ness of  this  Epistle.  It  is  not  our  intention  here  to  defend  such  gen- 
uineness. It  is  of  value  to  us  in  making  known  to  us  the  use  of  Scripture 
of  the  first  century. 


270  THE  CANON  OF  THE  CHURCH 

the  Romans  XVI.  14:  ''Salute  Asyncritus,  Phlegon,  Her- 
nias," hence  the  book  was  regarded  by  some  as  canonical 
Scripture.  It  is  joined  to  the  other  Scriptures  in  Codex  {»^ 
of  Mt.  Sinai.  Irenaeus,  Clement  of  Alexandria,  and  Origen 
reputed  it  divine  Scripture.  It  was  declared  apocryphal  in 
the  Canon  of  Gelasius.  It  has  always  been  considered  a 
treatise  valuable  for  Christian  erudition.  Its  author's  iden- 
tity will  always  remain  imcertain,  but  the  document  makes 
for  our  scope  by  showing  the  Christian  tradition  of  the  age 
immediately  succeeding  the  Apostolic  times.  It  is  called 
the  Pastor,  because  in  it  an  angel,  under  the  form  of  a  shep- 
herd, speaks.     Its  trend  is  chiefly  parenetic. 

Ecclesiasticus  XXVIII.  3.  Pastor,    Similitudo   IX.    23. 

"Homo      homini      reservat         "Deus  et   Dominus  noster, 

iram,  et  a  Deo  quaerit  mede-     qui  dominatur  omnium  rerum, 

lam. "  et  creaturae  suae  universae  habet 

potestatem,  offensas  memi- 
nisse  non  vult,  sed  ab  his  qui 
peccata  sua  confitentur  facile 
placatur.  Homo  vero,  cum 
et  languidus,  mortalis,  infir- 
mus  sit  repletus  peccatis,  ho- 
mini perseveranter  irascitur. ' ' 
The  works  attributed  to  St.  Dionysius,  the  Areopagite, 
employ  deuterocanonical  Scripttire.* 

*Dionysius  the  Areopagite  was  a  citizen  of  Athens,  at  the  time  that  Paul 
preached  the  Gospel  of  Christ  in  that  city.  He  was  among  the  first  men  of 
the  city,  a  member  of  the  highest  judicial  court,  called  ''A/aeto?  irdyo^^ 
Hill  of  Mars,  from  its  location  over  against  the  Acropolis,  on  the  West 
side.  Before  this  tribunal,  Paul  was  taken  to  be  judged,  for  his  doctrine. 
Acts  XVII.  By  his  preaching  in  that  assembly,  he  converted  Dionysius. 
In  the  Roman  Breviary,  the  feast  of  Dionysius  is  placed  on  the  9th  of 
October,  and  he  is  there  declared  to  have  been  sent  by  Pope  Clement  as 
bishop  of  Paris.  The  falsity  of  this  opinion  has  been  proven  by  the 
labors  of  the  BoUandists  and  others,  We  find  the  first  statement  of  the 
identity  of  the  Areopagite  and  Bishop  Dionysius  of  Paris  in  the  work 
which  the  Abbot  Hilduinus  compiled  at  the  command  of  Louis,  the 
Pious,  in  the  year  835  of  the  Christian  era.  In  the  obscure  writings  of 
Hilduinus,  we  find  it  positively  stated  that  Dionysius,  the  Areopagite, 
was  the  Bishop  of  Paris;  though,  at  the  same  time,  he  mentions  the 
doubts  of  those  who  refused  to  believe  this.  It  seems  that  Hilduinus 
was  a  man  of  no  critical  acumen,  and  was  deceived  into  his  error  by  the 
anonymous  Acts  of  the  Passion  of  St.  Dionysius,  published  about  the 


THE    CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH  271 

The  works,  De  Coelesti  Hierarchia,  De  Ecclesiastica  Hier- 
archia,  De  Divinis  Nominibus,  De  Mystica  Theologia,  and 
some  Epistles,  have  been  accredited  to  Dionysius.  The 
Bollandists  maintain  as  the  more  probable  opinion  that 
these  works  are  not  the  genuine  productions  of  the  Areo- 
pagite.  Their  value  as  patristic  testimonies  is  independent 
of  his  authorship,  since  certainly  they  reflect  the  tradition 
of  the  first  ages  of  the  Church. 

Sap.   VIII.    2.  De  Div.  Norn.  IV.  12. 

"Hanc  amavi,  et  exquisivi  **Et  in  iis  quae  aditum  ad 

a  juventute  mea,  et  quaesivi  Scrip turam   praeparant   quem- 

sponsam  mihi  earn  assumere,  dam   invenies   de    divina   Sa- 

et    amator   f actus    sum   formcB  pientia  ajentem:     Amator  fac- 

illius.'"  tus  sum  formes  illius.'' 

Sap.   VIII.    I.  De  Div.  Norn.  VII.  4. 

'' Attingit  ergo   a  -fine  usque  "Et  quia  (Deus)  per  omnia 

ad    finem    fortiter,    et    disponit  meat  pervadens,  ut  ait  Scrip- 

omnia  suaviter.  "  tura,  usque  ad  -finem,  omnium. " 

middle  of  the  eighth  century.  The  Bollandists  have  clearly  proven  that 
all  the  Founts  of  Hilduinus  were  spurious.  It  is  certain,  then,  that  the 
opinion  of  the  identity  of  the  Areopagite  and  the  Bishop  of  Paris  was 
unknown  before  the  middle  of  the  eighth  century,  and  that  it  had  then 
no  good  foundation.  It  results  from  the  voluminous  testimonials  ad- 
duced by  the  Bollandists  that  from  the  earliest  times,  the  Greeks  recog- 
nized that  the  Bishop  of  Paris  and  the  Areopagite  were  different  per- 
sons, and  such  opinion  seems  to  have  obtained  with  the  Latins  prior  to 
the  eighth  century.  One  positive  proof  that  Dionysius  did  not  become  the 
Bishop  of  Paris  is  in  a  canon  of  the  Synod  of  Sardis,  held  in  the  year 
347,  which  affirms  as  follows:  "NuUus  in  hac  re  inventtis  est  episcopus 
qui  de  majori  civitate  ad  minorem  transiret. ' '  This  plainly  establishes 
that,  up  to  the  year  347,  no  bishop  had  ever  been  transferred  from  a 
greater  to  a  less  see.  Therefore,  Dionysius  was  not  transferred  from 
Athens  to  Paris  at  that  time,  which  was  so  small  as  to  be  called  by  Julian 
the  Apostate  TroKiyvr]^  "oppidum, ' '  and  by  his  historian  Ammonius 
MaTceWinns  "Caatellum  Parisiorum."  Finally,  the  identity  is  clearly  dis- 
proven  by  the  fact  that  Dionysius,  the  bishop  of  Paris,  came  with  Rus- 
ticus  and  Eleutherius  to  Paris,  in  the  reign  of  Decius,  about  the  year  250 
A.  D.,  as  is  clearly  proven  by  the  Bollandists.  This  is  centuries  after  the 
period  of  Dionysius,  the  contemporary  of  St.  Paul.  We  conclude,  there- 
fore, that  the  distinction  between  these  two  persons  is  a  clearly  proven 
fact. 


272  THE  CANON  OF  THE  CHURCH 

In  the  Epistle  of  St.  Dionysius  to  Demophilus,  it  is  evi- 
dent that  he  alludes  to  the  angel  in  Tobias,  when  he  speaks 
in  the  first  chaptei;  of  the  "beneficis  angelis  de  quibus  theo- 
logia  qusedam  tradit." 

St.  Polycarp,  the  martyr  bishop  of  Smyrna,  in  his  Epistle 
to  the  Philippians  incorporates  a  clear  quotation  from  Tobias. 

Polycarp   Epist.    ad   Philip- 
Tobias  XII.  9.  penses   X. 
''Quoniam      eleemosyna      a  "Cum    potestis    benefacere, 

morte  liber  at,  et  ipsa  est  quae  nolite  differre,  quia  eleemosyna 

purgat    peccata,    et    facit    in-  a  morte  liber  at. " 

venire  misericordiam  et  vitam 

astern  am. " 

As  Polycarp  was  a  disciple  of  St.  John  the  Evangelist, 
his  use  of  Scripture  must  have  been  acquired  under  the  super- 
vision of  St.  John  himself.  This  isolated  quotation  implies  a 
liberal  knowledge  of  Scripture,  for  the  Fathers  quoted  from 
memory ;  such  knowledge  of  Tobias  could  scarcely  result  from 
cursory  readings.  It  must  have  resulted  from  assiduous 
study  and  use  of  a  collection  that  recognized  the  book  of 
Tobias  as  divine  Scripture.  Polycarp  certainly  reflects  the 
teaching  of  his  master,  and  we  have  here  the  implicit  ap- 
probation of  St.  John  the  Evangelist.*  These  are  but  scanty 
data,  it  is  true,  but  the  Apostolic  age  was  more  the  age  of 
oral  teaching  than  of  writing.  By  the  vicissitudes  of  time 
much  of  the  literary  product  of  that  age  has  perished,  and 
more  is  hid  in  obscurity.  As  when  looking  upon  objects 
from  afar,  many  are  but  dimly  discernible,  while  the  others 
are  lost  to  the  limited  sense  of  vision;  so  in  looking  back 

*Of  the  early  history  of  Polycarp,  we  know  nothing.  His  disciple,  St. 
Irenaeus,  testifies  that  he  was  taught  by  the  Apostles,  and  lived  in  close 
fellowship  with  many  who  had  seen  the  Lord.  [Adv.  Haer.  III.  3.]  He 
also  testifies  that  he  was  constituted  bishop  of  Smyrna,  and  that  he  fin- 
ished his  life  by  martyrdom  at  a  very  advanced  age.  He  is  celebrated 
for  his  strict  adhesion  to  the  true  doctrine,  and  his  corresponding  aversion 
to  heresy.  It  is  Polycarp  who  relates  that  John,  his  teacher,  at  one  time, 
ran  from  the  bath,  wherein  was  Cerinthus,  crying:  "Let  us  flee,  lest  the 
bath  should  fall  in,  as  long  as  Cerinthus,  that  enemy  of  truth,  is  within. " 

The  same  Polycarp,  once  meeting  Marcion,  who  said:  "Dost  thou 
know  us?"  replied:  "I  recognize  the  first  bom  of  Satan.  '  They  stabbed 
him  with  a  sword,  after  a  futile  attempt  to  burn  him  at  the  stake. 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  CHURCH  273 

through  the  long,  dim  vista  to  the  remote  age  of  ApostoUc 
times,  we  see  but  Httle  with  satisfying  distinctness;  other 
things  appear  bedimmed  and  shrouded  by  the  haze  of  time, 
while  many  other  things  are  entirely  lost  to  our  intellectual 
perception.  As  we  recede  from  the  remotest  object  of  our 
vision,  and  concentrate  our  gaze  upon  nearer  and  nearer 
data,  the  fulness  and  distinctness  grows  with  equal  pace; 
and  we  must  then  take  thought  not  to  obtain  testimonies, 
but  to  select  the  more  fitting  from  the  available  many. 

The  few  cited  should  evince  to  an  honest  mind  that  those 
who  succeeded  the  founders  of  the  everlasting  teaching 
organism,  recognized  and  used  the  deuterocanonical  Scrip- 
tures in  the  same  manner  as  the  protocanonical  ones.  We 
shall  now  pass  down  through  the  ages,  and  adduce  some 
representative  testimonies  of  every  age. 

iVthenagoras,  a  Greek  writer  who  presented  the  famous 
Legatio  pro  Christianis  to  Marcus  Aurelius  and  Commodus 
A.  D.  177,  quotes  Baruch  in  that  work. 

Athenag.  Legatio  pro  Chris- 
tianis, (secundum  Gesner, 
Banich  III.    36.  10). 

"Hie  est  Deus  noster;  neque  "Dominus  Deus  noster;  non 

est  alius  qui  cum  ipso  compare-      comparahitur  alius  ad  ilium. 
tur." 

St.  Hippolyte  wrote  commentaries  on  the  deuterocanoni- 
cal fragments  of  Daniel,  and,  in  his  exegetical  treatises, 
makes  frequent  use  of  the  deuterocanonical  works.* 

*From  the  testimony  of  Photius,  we  know  that  St.  Hippolyte  was  the 
disciple  of  Irenaeus,  who  died  about  the  year  202,  A.  D.  The  common 
opinion  of  the  old  writers  makes  him  a  bishop,  but  there  is  a  great  differ- 
ence of  opinion  concerning  his  see.  Eusebius  and  Jerome  confess  that 
they  can  establish  nothing  certain  concerning  it.  Anastasius,  Rom. 
Ecclesias  apocrisiarius,  Georgius  Syncellus,  Zonaras,  Nicephorus  Callisti, 
and  the  author  of  The  Paschal  Chronicle  make  him  bishop  of  Porto  in 
Italy,  one  of  the  suburban  bishops  of  Rome.  He  is  also  commonly 
designated  in  the  works  of  Greek  and  Latin  writers  as  a  "Roman  bishop," 
which  is  confirmatory  of  the  preceding  testimonies.  The  greatest  diver- 
sity of  opinion  exists  among  modern  writers  concerning  his  see.  The 
Bollandists  [Aug.  Tom.  IV.,  p.  510]  conjecture  that  he  was  a  bishop  of 
Arabia,  who  was  martyred  at  Porto  on  his  way  to  Rome;  that  thus 
gradually  the  error  arose  to  confound  the  unknown  bishop  with  the  See 
of  Porto,  where  he  was  martyred.  His  see  is  uncertain,  but  his  martyr- 
dom may  safely  be  placed  under  Alexander  Severus,  222-235.  His 
authorship  of  the  Commentaries  and  other  works  from  which  we  shall 
quote  is  undoubted. 

(18)  H.  S. 


274 


THE   CANON   OF   THE  CHURCH 


I.  Maccab.  II.  33 — 38. 

"Exite  et  facite  secundum 
verbum  regis  Antiochi  et  vi- 
vetis.  Et  dixerunt:  *Non  ex- 
ibimus,  neque  faciemus  ver- 
bum regis dicentes: 

Moriamur  omnes  in  simplici- 
tate  nostra '  .  .  .  et  mortui  sunt 
usque  ad  mille  animas  homi- 
num. " 

Tob.   III.    24. 

"In  illo  tempore  exauditae 
sunt  preces  amborum  in  con- 
spectu  gloriae  Summi  Dei,  et 
missus  est  Angelus  ut  curaret 
eos  ambos,  quorum  uno  tem- 
pore sunt  orationes  in  con- 
spectu  Domini  recitatae. " 


II.  Maccab.  VI.   7. 

"Ad  agitandum  colendum- 
que  Bacchanaliorum  solenne 
cogebantur  Judaei  hedera  re- 
dimiti  Baccho  pompam  ducere. 
Quod  si  qui  minus  in  Graecor- 
um  ritus  ac  mores  transire 
voluissent,  interficerentur. " 


Sap.  II.   12 — 20. 

"Circumveniamus  igitur  jus- 
tum,  quoniam  inutilis  est  no- 
bis, et  contrarius  est  operibus 
nostris,  et  improperat  nobis 
peccata   legis,    et   diffamat   in 


S.  Hip.  Frag,  in  Dan.XXXI., 
XXXII. 

"Exite  et  facite  praecep- 
tum  regis  et  vivetis.  Illi  autem 
dixerunt:  'Neque  exibimus, 
neque  faciemus  praeceptum  re- 
gis: moriemur  in  simplicitate 
nostra;  *et  interfecit  ex  eis 
mille  animas  hominum. " 

S.  Hip.  In  Susannam  V.  55. 

"Porro  ostendit,  quo  tem- 
pore Susanna  ad  Deum  oravit, 
fuitque  exaudita,  missum  ei 
fuisse  angelum  qui  eum  ad- 
juvaret  baud  secus  ac  se  res 
in  Tobia  et  Sara  habuit;  am- 
bobus  enim  eadem  die  eadem- 
que  hora  orantibus,  exaudita 
est  amborum  oratio,  missus- 
que  est  angelus  Raphael  qui 
eos  sanaret. " 

S.  Hip.  De  Christo  et  Anti- 
Christo  XLIX. 

"Nam  et  ille  decretum  tulit 
.  .  .  cunctis  immolaturos  atque 
hedera  coronatos  Baccho  cir- 
cuituros.  Qui  nolint  parere, 
hos  cniciatibus  atque  tormen- 
tis  exagitatos  neci  tradendos 
esse.  Ac  si  quis  haec  sigillatim 
legere  velit  singulaque  lustrare, 
in  libro  Machabaeorum  prae- 
scripta  inveniet. " 

S.  Hip.  Adv.  Judaeos,  IX. 

"Producam  in  medio  etiam 
prophetiam  Salomonis  de 
Christo,  quae  aperto  et  per- 
spicue  quae  Judaeos  spectant 
edisserit.    Ait  enim  Propheta: 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH 


275 


nos  peccata  disciplinae  nostrae. 
Promittit     se     scientiam     Dei 
habere,  et  filium  Dei  se  nomi- 
nat.      Factus  est  nobis  in  tra- 
ductionem    cogitationum  nos- 
trarum.    Gravis  est  nobis  etiam 
ad    videndum,    quoniam    dis- 
similis  est  aliis  vita  illius,  et 
immutatae  sunt  viae  ejus.  Tam- 
quam  nugaces  aestimati  sumus 
ab  illo,  et  abstinet  se  a  viis 
nostris   tamquam   ab   immun- 
ditiis;    et    praefert    novissima 
justorum,  et  gloriatur  patrem 
se  habere   Deum.      Videamus 
ergo  si  sermones  ilHus  veri  sint, 
et  tentemus  quae  ventura  sunt 
illi,  et  sciemus  quae  erunt  no- 
vissima   illius.       Si    enim    est 
verus  filius  Dei,  suscipiet  ilium, 
et  liberabit  eum  de  manibus 
contrariorum.     Contumelia  et 
tormento    interrogemus    eum, 
ut  probemus  patientiam  illius. 
sciamus  reverentiam    ejus,  et 
probemus     patientiam     illius. 
Morte    turpissima    condemne- 
mus  eum:  erit  enim  ei  respect- 
tus    ex    sermonibus    illius." 


Sap.  V.   I. 

"Tunc  stabunt  justi  in 
magna  constantia  adversus  eos 
qui  se  angustiaverunt  et  qui 
abstulerunt  labores  eorum. 
Vidente§  turbabuntur  timore 
horribili,  et  mirabuntur  in  su- 
bitatione  insperatae  salutis, 
dicentes  intra  se,  poenitudine 
affecti  et  prae  augustia  spiritus 


Non  rede  cogitaverunt  impii  de 
Christo,     dicentes:         Circum- 
veniamus  justum,  quoniam  in- 
utilis   est  nobis   et   contrarius 
est    operibus    et    sermonibus 
nostris,    et    improperat    nobis 
peccata  legis;  et  promittit  se 
scientiam  Dei  habere,  et  Filium 
Dei  se  nominat.     Postea  dicit: 
Gravis  est  nobis  etiam  ad  vi- 
dendum, quoniam  dissimilis  est 
aliis  vita  illius,   et  immutatae 
sunt  viae  ejus.    Tamquam  nu- 
gaces aestimati  sumus  ab  illo 
et  abstinet  se  a  viis    nostris 
tamquam  ab  immunditiis,   et 
praefert    novissima    justorum. 
.  .  .  Ait  igitur  iterum  Salomon 
in  persona  Judaeorum  de  hoc 
justo  qui  est  Christus:  Factus 
est  nobis  in  traductionem  cogi- 
tationum nostrarum,  et  gloria- 
tur Patrem  se  habere  Deum. 
Videamus  ergo  si  sermones  il- 
lius veri  sint,  et  tentemus  quae 
erunt  novissima  illius.   Si  enim 
est  Justus  Dei  filius,  suscipiet 
ilium,  liberabit  ilium  de  mani- 
bus contrariorum.    Morte  tur- 
pissima    condemnemus     eum: 
erit    enim    respectus    ejus    ex 
sermonibus  illius. " 

S.  Hip.  Adv.  Judaeos,  X. 
"Et  iterum  Solomon  de 
Christo  et  Judaeis  dicit  quod, 
quando  stabit  Justus  in  magna 
constantia  ante  faciem  eorum 
qui  eum  affiixerunt  et  sermones 
ejus  repudiarunt:  Videntes 
turbabuntur  timore  horribili, 
et  mirabuntur  in  subitatione 
insperatae    salutis,    et    dicent 


276 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH 


gementes:  Hi  sunt  quos  ha- 
buimus  aliquando  in  derisum 
et  in  similitudinem  improperii. 
Nos  insensati  vitam  illorum 
aestimabamus  insaniam  et  fi- 
nem  illorum  sine  honore:  ecce 
quomodo  computati  sunt  inter 
filios  Dei,  et  inter  sanctos  sors 
illorum  est.  Ergo  erravimus 
a  via  veritatis,  et  justitiae 
lumen  non  luxit  nobis,  et  sol 
intelligentiae  non  est  ortus 
nobis.  Lassati  sumus  in  via 
iniquitatis  et  perditionis,  et 
ambulavimus  vias  difficiles, 
viam  autum  Domini  ignora- 
vimus.  Quid  nobis  profuit 
superbia?  aut  divitiarum  jac- 
tantia  quid  contulit  nobis? 
Transierunt  omnia  ilia  tam- 
quam  umbra,  et  tamquam  nun- 
tius  percurrens. " 

Baruch   III.    36—38. 

"Hie  est  Deus  noster,  neque 
est  alius  qui  cum  ipso  com- 
paretur.  Hie  adinvenit  om- 
nem  viam  disciplinae,  et  tra- 
didit  illam  Jacob  puero  suo 
et  Israel  dilecto  suo.  Post 
haec,  in  terris  visus  est,  et  cum 
hominibus  conversatus  est.' ' 


intra  se,  poenitudine  affecti, 
et  prae  angustia  spiritus  ge- 
mentes: Hie  est  quem  habui- 
mus  aliquando  in  derisum  et 
in  similitudinem  improperii. 
Nos  insensati  vitam  illius  ex- 
is  timabamus  insaniam  et  finem 
illius  sine  honore.  Quomodo 
computatus  est  in  filiis  Dei, 
et  in  Sanctis  sors  illius  est? 
Ergo  erravimus  a  via  veritatis ; 
et  justitiae  lumen  non  luxit 
nobis,  et  sol  non  ortus  est  nobis. 
Lassati  sumus  in  via  iniqui- 
tatis et  perditionis.  Ambula- 
vimus vias  difficiles;  viam  au- 
tem  Domini  ignoravimus.  Quid 
nobis  profuit  superbia  nostra? 
Transierunt  omnia  ilia  tam- 
quam umbra." 


S.  Hip.  Contra  Noet. 

'  *  Dicit  Scriptura  in  alio  loco ; 
Hie  est  Deus;  non  reputabitur 
alius  ad  eum-.  .  .  Invenit  om- 
nem  viam  scientiae,  et  dedit 
illam  Jacob  puero  suo  et  Israel 
dilecto  suo  .  .  .  Post  haec  in 
terra  visus  est,  et  cum  homini- 
bus conversatus  est." 


In  the  Constitutiones  Apostolicag,  we  find  the  following 
quotations  or  equivalent  allusions:  Ecclesiasticus,  eight 
times ;  Judith,  four  times ;  Wisdom,  four  times ;  Tobias,  once ; 
I.  Maccab.,  once. 

Irenaeus,  the  stern  defender  of  the  Catholic  truth  against 
heresy,  is  a  certain  advocate  of  the  deuterocanonical  books.* 

*St.  Irenaeus  was  a  native  of  Greece,  in  the  first  half  of  the  second 
century  of  the  Christian  era.  He  was  a  disciple  of  Polycarp,  and  was 
sent  to  Gaul  in  157  A.  D.  He  was,  at  first,  priest  at  the  church  at  Lyon, 
and,  afterwards,  bishop  of  that  see.     He  made  of   that  city  the  most 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH 


277 


Dan.    XIV.    3—4. 

' '  Porro  Daniel  adorabat 
Deum  suum.  Dixitque  ei  rex: 
quare  non  adoras  Bel?  Qui 
respondens  ait  ei:  Quia  non 
colo  idola  manufacta,  sed  vi- 
ventem  Deum  qui  creavit  Coel- 
um  et  terram,  et  habet  potes- 
tatem  omnis  carnis. " 

Ibid.   23 — 24. 

"Et  dixit  rex  Daniel:  Ecce 
nunc  non  potes  dicere  quia 
iste  non  sit  Deus  vivens:  adora 
ergo  eum. 

"Dixitque  Daniel:  Dominum 
Deum  meum  adorabo,  quia 
ipse  est  Deus  vivens;  iste  au- 
tem  non  est  Deus  vivens." 

Dan.  XIII.   20. 

"Ecce  ostia  pomarii  clausa 
sunt,   et  nemo  nos  videt. " 


Dan.    XIII.    52—53. 

*  *  Inveterate  dierum  malo- 
rum,  nunc  venerunt  peccata 
tua  quae  operabaris  prius ;  judi- 
cans  judicia  injusta,  innocen- 
tes  opprimens,  et  dimittens 
noxios,    dicente    Domino:    in- 


Con  tra  Haereses,  Lib.  IV.  5. 

**Quem  (Deum)  et  Daniel 
Propheta,  cum  dixisset  ei  Cy- 
rus rex  Persarum:  'Quare  non 
adoras  Bel?'  annuntiavit  di- 
cens;  quoniam  non  colo  idola 
manufacta,  sed  vivum  Deum, 
qui  constituit  Ccelum  et  ter- 
ram, et  habet  omnis  carnis 
dominationem.  Iterum  dixit: 
Dominum  Deum  meum  ado- 
rabo, quoniam  hie  est  Deus 
vivus. " 


Iren.  Contra  Haereses,  Lib. 
IV.  XXVI.  3. 

"Qui  vero  crediti  quidem 
sunt  a  multis  esse  presbyteri, 
serviunt  autem  suis  voluptati- 
bus  .  .  .  .  et  dicunti  nemo  nos 
videt.'' 

Iren.  Contra  Haereses  Lib. 
Iv.   XXVI.   3. 

"Audient  eas  quae  sunt  a 
Daniele  Propheta  voces:  Semen 
Chanaan  et  non  Juda,  species 
seduxit  te,  et  concupiscentia 
evertit  cor  tuum;  inveterate 
dierum    malorum,    nunc    ad- 


flourishing  center  of  Catholicity  in  all  Gaul.  His  erudition  was  vast  and 
precise.  He  advocated  moderation  iu  the  schism  of  the  Asiatic  bishops 
under  Pope  Victor  I.  The  influence  of  Papias  drew  him  into  the  error 
of  the  mitigated  Millenarianism.  His  chief  work  is  his  Treatise  against 
Heresies,  in  five  books.  He  was  martyred  in  the  fifth  general  persecu- 
tion in  202.  By  the  the  testimony  of  Eusebius,  he  recognized  the  epistle 
to  the  Hebrews  and  Wisdom,  and  quoted  from  them.  [Hist.  Eccles.  V. 
36.]  We  shall  collate  a  few  passages.  In  the  fourth  book  Contra  Hasreses, 
we  find  scriptural  use  of  the  deuterocanonical  fragments  of  Daniel. 


278 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH 


nocentem  et  justum  non  m- 
terficies. 

Ibid.  56. 

"Semen  Chanaan  et  non 
Juda,  species  decepit  te,et  con- 
cupiscentia  subvertit  cor 
tuum." 

Sap.  VI.  19 — 20. 

"Custoditio  autem  legum 
consummatio  incorruptionis 
est,  incorniptio  autem  facit 
esse  proximum  Deo." 

Baruch  IV.  36— V. 

"Circumspice,  Jerusalem,  ad 
orientem  et  vide  jucunditatem 
a  Deo  tibi  venientem.  Ecce 
enim  veniunt  filii  tui  quos  di- 
misisti  dispersos;  veniunt  col- 
lecti  ab  oriente  usque  ad  oc- 
cidentem,  in  verbo  Sancti  gau- 
dentes  in  honorem  Dei." 

Cap.  V.  Exue  te,  Jerusalem, 
stola  luctus  et  vexationis  tuae, 
et  indue  te  decore  et  honore 
ejus  quae  a  Deo  tibi  est  sem- 
piternae  gloriae.  Circumdabit 
te  Deus  diploide  justitiae,  et 
imponet  mitram  capiti  honoris 
aeterni.  Deus  enim  ostendet 
splendorem  suum  in  te,  omni 
qui  sub  coelo  est.  Nomina- 
bitur  enim  tibi  nomen  tuum  a 
Deo  in  sempiternum;  pax  jus- 
titiae et  honor  pietatis.  Ex- 
surge,  Jerusalem,  et  sta  in  ex- 
celso,  et  circumspice  ad  orien- 
tem, et  vide  collectos  filios 
tuos  ab  oriente  sole  usque  ad 


venerunt  peccata  tua  quae 
faciebas  antea,  judicans  ju- 
dicia  injusta ;  et  innocentes  qui- 
dem  damnabas ;  dimittebas  ve- 
ro  nocentes,  dicente  Domino: 
Innocentem  et  justum  non 
occides. " 

Ibid.    XXXVIII.    3. 

"Visio  autem  Dei  efficax  in- 
corruptionis est ;  incorruptio 
autem  proximum  facit  esse 
Deo." 

Iren.  Contra  Haereses  Lib.  V. 
XXXV.    I. 

* '  Hoc  significavit  Jeremias 
propheta:*  Circumspice,  di- 
cens,  ad  orientem,  Jerusalem 
et  vide  laetitiam  quae  adven- 
tat  tibi  ab  ipso  Deo.  Ecce 
venient  filii  tui  quos  emisisti, 
venient  coUecti  ab  oriente  us- 
que ad  occidentem  verbo  illius 
sancti,  gaudentes  ea  quae  a 
Deo  tuo  est  claritate.  Exuere 
Jerusalem,  habitum  luctus  et 
afiiictionis  tuae,  et  induere 
decorem  ejus  quae  a  Deo  tuo 
est  claritatis  in  aetemum.  Cir- 
cumdare  amictum  duplicem 
ejus  quae  a  Deo  tuo  est  jus- 
titiae, impone  mitram  super 
caput  tuum  gloriae  aetemae. 
Deus  enim  demonstrabit  ei 
quae  sub  coelo  est  universae 
tuum  fulgorem.  Vocabitur 
namque  nomen  tuum  ab  ipso 
Deo  in  aetemum,  pax  justi- 
tiae et  gloriae  colenti  Deo. 
Surge,  Jerusalem,  et  sta  in  ex- 


♦Baruch  was  by  many  considered  an  integral  part  of  Jeremias. 


THE   CANON   OF    THE   CHURCH 


279 


occidentem,  in  verbo  sancti 
gaudentes  Dei  memoria.  Exier- 
unt  enim  abs  te  pedibus  ducti 
ab  inimicis:  adducet  autem 
illos  Dominus  ad  te  portatos 
in  honore  sicut  filios  regni. 
Constituit  enim  Deus  humil- 
iare  omnem  montem  excelsum 
et  rapes  perennes  et  convalles 
replere  in  aequalitatem  terras 
ut  ambulet  Israel  diligenter 
in  honorem  Dei.  Obumbra- 
verunt  autem  et  silvae  et  omne 
lignum  suavitatis  Israel  ex 
mandate  Dei.  Adducet  enim 
Deus  Israel  cum  jucunditate 
in  lumine  majestatis  suae,  cum 
misericordia  et  justitia  quae 
est  ex  ipso." 


celso,  et  circumspice  ad  orien- 
tem,  et  vide  collectos  filios 
tuos  a  solis  ortu  usque  ad  oc- 
cidentem, verbo  illius  sancti 
gaudentes,  ipsam  Dei  recorda- 
tionem. 

"Profecti  sunt  enim  a  te 
pedites  dum  adducerentur  ab 
inimicis.  Introducet  illos  Deus 
ad  te  portatos  cum  gloria  tam- 
quam  thronum  regni.  Decrevit 
enim  Deus  ut  humilietur  om- 
nis  mons  excelsus  et  congeries 
setemae,  et  ut  valles  implean- 
tur  ad  redigendam  planitiem 
terrae,  ut  ambulet  Israel  tuti 
Dei  gloria.  Umbracula  autem 
intexuerunt  silvae,  et  omne 
lignum  boni  odoris  ipsi  Israel, 
praecepto  Dei.  Praeibit  enim 
Deus  cum  laetitia,  lumine  cla- 
ritatis  suae  cum  misericordia 
et  justitia  quae  ab  ipso  est.'' 


Clement  of  Alexandria  has  drawn  a  large  part  of  his 
scriptural  references  from  deuterocanonical  sources.* 

Ecclesiasticus  XXI.    7.  Clem.  Paed.  VIII. 

' '  Qui  odit  correptionem,  ves-         * ' Scrip turam  perperam  intel- 

tigium   est   peccatoris;   et   qui  ligentes  quae  sic  dicit:    Et  qui 

timet    Deum,    convertetur   ad  timet  Dominum  convertetur  ad 

cor  suum.  "  cor  suum." 


*Clement  of  Alexandria  was  a  Platonic  philosopher  of  Alexandria. 
He  was  converted  by  St.  Pantenus,  who  was  at  the  head  of  the  Alexan- 
drian school  in  the  latter  half  of  the  second  century.  After  the  death  of 
Pantenus,  Clement  became  chief  of  this  famous  school  in  190,  A.  D. 
Origen  was  one  of  his  pupils.  He  died  about  the  year  217,  A.  D.  His 
chief  works  are  Cohortatio  ad  Gentes,  Psedagogus,  '2rp(OfiaTa  or  Mis- 
cellanea, Quis  Dives  Salvetur,  and  Fragments.  Among  all  these,  the 
Stromata  are  the  most  famous.  Clement  is  the  great  representative  of 
Alexandrian  tradition. 


280 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH 


Sap.    XL    25. 

"Nihil  odisti  eorum  quae 
fecisti:  nee  enim  odiens  aliquid 
eonstituisti  aut  feeisti. " 

Eeeli.  XXII.  6-8. 

*  *  Flagella  et  doetrina  in  om- 
ni  tempore  sapientia.  Qui  docet 
fatuum,  quasi  qui  conglutinat 
testam.  Qui  narrat  verbum 
non  audienti,  quasi  qui  ex- 
citat  dormientem  de  gravi 
somno. " 

Eccli.  XXXIV.  14,  15. 

"Spiritus  timentium  Deum 
quaeritur,  et  in  respectu  illius 
benedicetur.  Spes  enim  illo- 
rum  in  salvantem  illos  et  oculi 
Dei  in  diligentes  se. " 

Eccli.  I.  27,  28. 

"Timor  Domini  expellit  pec- 
catum,  nam  qui  sine  timore 
est   non   potest  justificari. " 

Ibid.    22. 

"Corona  sapientiae,  timor 
Domini,  replens  pacem  et  salu- 
tis  fructum. " 

Eccli.   XVI.    13. 

' '  Secundum  misericordiam 
suam,  sic  correptio  illius  hom- 
nem  secundum  opera  sua  jud- 
icat. " 

Ibid.   12. 

"  Misericordia  enim  et  ira 
est  cum  illo;  potens  exoratio 
et  effundens  iram. " 


Clem.  Paed.  Ibid. 
"Nihil  enim  est  quod  odio 
habet  Dominus." 

Clem.  Ibid. 

"Flagella  enim  et  disciplina 
in  omni  tempore  sapientia.  Qui 
testam  conglutinat,  et  stultum 
docet  ad  sensum,  inquit.  .  .  . 
Propterea  aperte  subjunxit: 
Excitans  dormientem  e  pro- 
fun  do  somno,  qui  est  ex  aliis 
omnibus  maxime  morti  similis. ' ' 

Clem.  Ibid. 

"Quoniam  spiritus  timens 
Dominum  vivet.  Spes  enim  est 
in  eum  qui  ipsos  salvos  facit." 


Clem.  Paed.  Lib.  I.  VIII. 

*  *  Timor  enim  Domini  peccata 
extrudit :  Qui  est  autem  sine  tim- 
ore non  poterit  justificari,  inquit 
Scriptura." 

Ibid. 

"Corona  itaque  sapientice,  in- 
quit  Sapientia,  timor  Domini.''"^ 

Ibid. 

'  *  Virum ,  inquit ,  secundum 
opera  sua  judicabit." 


Ibid. 

"De  eo  quoque  aperte  dicit 
Sap.:  Misericordia  enim  et  ira 
cum  ipso.  Dominus  enim  his 
utrisque  solus  est  potens,  iram 


*Ecclesiasticus  was   frequently   termed    by   the   Fathers    Sapientia 
Sirach. 


THE   CANON    OF   THE   CHURCH 


281 


Eccli.  VII.  25,  26. 

"Filii  tibi  sunt?  erudi  illos, 
et  curva  illos  a  pueritia  il- 
lorum.  Filiae  tibi  sunt?  serva 
corpus  illarum,  et  non  ostend- 
as  hilarem  faciem  tuam  ad 
illas." 

Eccli.  XXXII.   21. 

' '  Peccator  homo  vitabit  cor- 
reptionem,  et  secundum  vo- 
luntatem  suam  inveniet  com- 
parationem. " 

Eccli.  XVIII.  13,  14;  XVI. 
12. 

Baruch   IV.    4- 

"Beati  sumus,  Israel,  quia 
quae  Deo  placent  manifesta 
sunt  nobis." 


Baruch  III.  9. 

*  *  Audi,  Israel,  mandata  vitae : 
auribus  percipe  ut  scias  pru- 
dentiam. " 

Baruch   III.    13. 

"Nam  si  in  via  Dei  ambu- 
lasses,  habit  asses  utique  in 
pace  sempiterna. " 


EccH.  XXXIII.  6. 

"Equus  emissarius,  sic  et 
amicus  subsannator,  sub  omni 
suprasedente  hinnit. " 


effundens  ad  propitiationem  ex 
magna  sua  misericordia.  Ita 
etiam  ejus  reprehensio." 

Clem.  Paed.  Lib.  I.  Cap.  IX- 

"Sunt  tibi  filii?  Castiga  eos, 
suadet  Sapientia,  et  inflecte  eos 
a  juventute  sua.  Sunt  tibi  filiae 
attende  corpori  earum,  et  ne 
vultum  tuum  apud  eas  exhilara- 
veris," 

Clem.  Paed.  Lib.  I.  Cap.  IX. 

" —  quoniam  peccator  homo 
fugit  reprehensionem." 


Clem.  Paed.  Lib.  I.  Cap.  IX. 

Clem.  Paed.  Lib.  I.  X. 

"Jam  quoque  per  Jeremiam 
enarrat  prudentiam:  Beati  su- 
mus, Israel,  dicens,  quod  quae 
Deo  grata  sunt,  a  nobis  cognita 
sunt." 

Ibid. 

"Audi,  Israel,  mandata  vitae, 
ausculta  ut  cognoscas  pruden- 
tiam." 

Ibid. 

"Quinetiam  .  .  .  per  Jere- 
miam hortatur  (paedagogus)  di- 
cens: Via  Dei  si  ambulasses, 
habitasses  in  pace  in  saecu- 
lum." 

Clem.  Paed.  Lib.  I.  XIII. 

"Hinc  etiam  dicit  Sapientia: 
Equus  ad  coitum  libidinosus,  et 
adulter  irrationali  jumento  as- 
similatus;  et  ideo  subjungit: 
Quocumque  super  eum  sedente 
hinnit." 


282 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH 


Sap.  VI.    19. 

"Cura  ergo  disciplinae  di- 
lectio  est,  et  dilectio  custodia 
legum  illius  est;  custoditio  au- 
tem  legum  consummatio  in- 
comiptionis  est." 

Sap.  XVI.   26. 

" —  ut  scirent  filii  tui  quos 
dilexisti,  Domine,  quoniam  non 
nativitatis  fnictus  pascunt 
homines,  sed  sermo  tuus,  hos 
qui  in  te  crediderint  con- 
servat. " 

Eccli.     XVIII.     32.     (juxta 

Grtecum.) 
"Ne    delecteris    multis    de- 
liciis." 


Eccli.  XXXI.  36-38. 

"Exultatio  animae  et  cor- 
dis, vinum  moderate  potatum. 

"38.  Vinum  multum  pota- 
tum irritationem  et  iram  et 
ruinas  multas  facit. " 


Eccli.  XXXI.  31. 

*  *  Ignis  probat  f  errum  durum ; 
sic  vinum  corda  superborum 
arguet  in  ebrietate  potatum." 

Ibid.   30.    (juxta  Graecum.) 
"In   vino   virum  ne   te   ex- 

hibeas:    vinum    enim    multos 

perdidit. " 


Clem.  Paed.  Lib.  II.  Cap.  I. 

"Cura  autem  disciplinae  est 
caritas,  quam  dicit  Sapientia, 
caritas  vero  observatio  legum 
est." 


Ibid. 

"Discant,  inquit,  filii  tui 
quos  dilexisti,  Domine,  quod 
non  generationes  fructuum  nu- 
triant  hominem,  sed  verbum 
tuum  eos  qui  tibi  credunt  con- 
servat." 


Clem.  Paed.  Lib.  II.  Cap.  I. 

"Ne  laeteris  autem  propter 
execrandas  delicias,  dicit  Sapi- 
entia." 

Ibid.  Cap.  II. 

"lUud  ergo  bene  dictum  est: 
Exultatio  animae  et  cordis  vi- 
num creatum  est  ab  initio,  si 
quantum  satis  est  bibatur. ' ' 

Ibid. 

"Atqueante  tragoediam  cla- 
mavit  Sapientia:  'Vinum  quod 
bibitur  multum  in  irritatione  et 
omni  lapsu  replet.'  " 

Clem.  Ibid. 

"Praeclare  profecto  dictum 
est:  Fornacem  quidem  inter 
tingendum  probare  ferri  aciem, 
vinum  autem  cor  superborum. ' ' 

Clem.  Ibid. 

"In  vino,  inquit,  ne  te  virum 
fortem  praebeas;  multos  enim 
vinum  reddidit  inutiles." 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH 


283 


Eccli.  XXVI.   II. 

**Mulier  ebriosa  ira  magna, 
et  contumelia  et  turpitude  il- 
lius  non  tegetur. " 

Eccli.  XXXI.  23. 
"Vigilia,  cholera  et  tortura 
viro  infrunito." 

Baruch  III.    16-19. 

"Ubi  sunt  principes  gen- 
tium? et  qui  dominatur  super 
bestias  quae  sunt  super  terram  ? 
qui  in  avibus  coeli  ludunt?  qui 
argentum  thesaurizat  et  au- 
rum  in  qua  confidunt  homines, 
et  non  est  finis  acquisitionis 
eorum?  qui  argentum  fabri- 
cant  et  solliciti  sunt,  nee  est 
inventio  operum  illorum?  Ex- 
terminati  sunt,  et  ad  inferos 
descenderunt  et  alii  loco  eorum 
surrexerunt. " 


Eccli.   XXI.    23. 

"Fatuus  in  risu  exaltat  vo- 
cem  suam;  vir  autem  sapiens 
vix  tacite  ridebit. " 

EccH.   XX.   5. 

"Est  tacens  qui  invenitur 
sapiens,  et  est  odibilis,  qui 
procax  est   ad  loquendum. " 

Ibid.    8. 

"Qui  multis  utitur  verbis 
laedet  animam  suam;  et  qui 
potestatem  sibi  sumit  injuste, 
odietur. " 


Ibid. 

"Ira  autem,  inquit,  magna 
est  mulier  ebria.  .  .  .  quoniam 
suam  non  celat  turpi tudinem." 

Ibid. 

"Labor  autem  vigiliae,  inquit, 
et  bilis  et  tormentum  est  cum 
homine  insatiabili . ' ' 

Clem.  Paed.  Lib.  II.  Cap.  III. 

"Pulcherrime  itaque  alicubi 
dicit  divina  Scriptura,  ad  eos 
qtii  sunt  sui  amantes  et  arro- 
gantes  verba  dirigens:  Ubi  sunt 
qui  gentibus  imperabant  et  qui 
dominabantur  feris  quae  sunt 
super  terram?  qui  in  coeli  avi- 
bus illudebant:  qui  argenti  et 
auri  thesauros  congregabant  in 
quibus  homines  habebant  fidu- 
ciam,  et  non  est  finis  acquisi- 
tionis eorum?  qui  aurum  et 
argentum  fabricabantur  et  er- 
ant  solliciti?  non  est  inventio 
operum  illorum.  Evanuerunt, 
et  ad  inferos  descenderunt." 

Clem.  Paed.  Lib.  II.  Cap.  V. 

"Stultus  autem  in  risu  ex- 
tollit  vocem  suam,  inquit  Scrip- 
tura: vir  autem  astutus  vix  sen- 
sim  subri debit." 

Clem.  Paed.  Lib.  II.  Cap.  VI. 

"Est  enim  tacens  qui  inveni- 
tur sapiens ;  et  est  qui  odio  hab- 
etur  ob  multam  loquacitatem." 

Ibid. 

"Quin  etiam  ipse  nugator  af- 
fert  sibi  ipsi  fastidium  ac  satie- 
tatem:  Qui  enim  multiplicat 
sermonem,  odit  animam  suam. ' ' 


284 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH 


Ibid.  XXXI.  41. 

**In  convivio  vini  non  ar- 
guas  proximum,  et  non  de- 
spicias  e-um  in  jucunditate  il- 
lius." 

Eccli.  XIV.   I. 

"Beatus  vir  qui  non  est 
lapsus  verbo  ex  ore  suo,  et 
non  est  stimulatus  in  tristitia 
delicti." 

Eccli.  IX.   12. 

"Cum  aliena  muliere  ne  sed- 
eas  omnino,  nee  accumbas  cum 
ea  super  cubitum. " 

Ibid   13. 

" — et  non  altercens  cum 
ilia  in  vino,  ne  forte  declinet 
cor  tuum  in  illam,  et  san- 
guine tuo  labaris  in  perditio- 
nem. " 

Eccli.    XXXI.    19-20. 

' '  Utere  quasi  homo  f rugi  his 
quae  tibi  apponuntur,  ne,  cum 
manducas,  multum  odio  ha- 
bearis.  Cessa  prior  causa  dis- 
ciplinae,  et  noli  nimius  esse, 
ne  forte  offendas. " 

Ecch.  XXXII.   15. 

**Et  hora  surgendi  non  te 
trices:  prsecurre  autem  prior 
in  domum  tuam. " 

Eccli.  XXXII.  4,   10,   II. 

"Loquere,  major  natu;  decet 
enim  te.  Adolescens,  loquere 
in  causa  tua  vix.  Si  bis  inter- 
rogatus  fueris,  habeat  caput 
responsum  tuum. " 


Ibid.  Cap.  VII. 

"In  convivio  autem,  inquit, 
ne  argueris  proximum,  et  ei  op- 
probrii  sermonem  ne  dixeris." 

Ibid. 

"Beatus  re  vera  vir  ille  est  qui 
non  est  lapsus  in  ore  suo,  vel 
non  compunctus  est  in  moles - 
tia  peccati." 

Ibid. 

"Cum  muliere  quae  viro  sub- 
jecta  est  ne  omnino  sedeas,  et 
ne  super  cubitum  cum  ea  accu- 
bueris." 

Ibid. 

"Et  ideo  subjungit:  neque 
cum  ea  in  vino  congrediaris,  ne 
quando  inclinet  cor  tuum  in  ip- 
sam,  et  sanguine  tuo  labatur  ad 
interitum." 

Ibid. 

"Comede,  inquit,  ut  homo 
quae  apponuntur;  cessa  autem 
primus  disciplinae  gratia.  Et  si 
in  medio  plurium  sederis  ne 
ante  ipsos  manum  porrigas." 

Ibid. 

"Cum  est,  inquit,  tempus 
surgendi,  ne  sis  postremus,  et 
revertere  in  domum  tuam." 

Ibid. 

"Senior,  loquere  in  convivio, 
te  enim  decet.  .  .  .  Adolescens, 
tibi  quoquepermittitSapientia, 
loquere  si  te  opus  sit,  vix  cum 
bis  interrogatus  fueris;  ser- 
monem autem  tuum  paucis  in 
summam  redige." 


THE   CANON   OF    THE   CHURCH 


285 


Eccli.     IX.  25  Ibid. 

'Terribilis    est     in    civitate  "Terribilis  est  in  interitu  suo 

sua  vir  linguosus."  vir  linguosus." 


Eccli.  VII.  15. 

''Noli  verbosus  esse  in  mul- 
titudine  presbyterorum,  et  non 
iteres  verbtim  in  oratione 
tua." 


Eccli.     XXXIII.    I,  2,  7. 

^'Honora  medicum  propter 
necessitatem  ;  etenim  ilium 
creavit  Altissimus.  A  Deo  est 
enim  omnis  medela,  et  a  rege 
accipiet  donation  em.  In  his 
curans  mitigabit  dolorem,  et 
unguentarius  faciet  pigmenta 
suavitatis  et  unctiones  conficiet 
sanitatis.'' 


Ibid. 

"Ne  nugeris  in  multitudine 
seniorum  ....  Sermonem 
ne  iteraveris  in  oratione  tua.  " 

Clem.  Paed.  Lib.  II.  Cap. 
VIII. 

* '  Honora  autem  medicum 
propter  ejus  utilitatem,  in  quit 
Scrip tura.  Ipsum  enim  creavit 
Altissimus.  A  Domino  autem 
est  medicina.  Deinde  sub- 
jungit:  Et  unguentarius  faciet 
mistionem. " 


Eccli.  XXXIX.  17-19. 

"In  voce  dicit :  Obaudite 
me,  divini  fructus,  et  quasi  rosa 
plantata  super  rivos  aquarum 
fructificate.  Quasi  Libanus 
odorem  suavitatis  habete.  Flo- 
re te  flores,  quasi  lilium,  et  date 
odorem  et  frondete  in  gra- 
tiam,  et  collaudate  canticum, 
et  benedicite  Dominum  in 
operibus  suis." 


Clem.  Paed.  Lib.  II.  Cap. 
VIII. 

"Exaudite  me,  inquit,  et 
tamquam  rosa  plantata  in 
fluentis  aquarum  germinate ; 
tamquam  Libanus,  suavem 
odorem  emittite,  et  benedicite 
Dominem  super  opera  ejus." 


Ibid.  31. 

**Initium  necessariae  rei  vitae 
hominum:  aqua,  ignis  et  fer- 
rum,  sal,  lac,  et  panis  simila- 
gineus,  et  mel  et  botrus  uvae 
et  oleum  et  vestimentum.'' 


Ibid. 

"Dicit  itaque  Scriptura; 
Aqua,  et  ignis,  et  ferrum,  et 
lac,  simila  f rumen ti,  et  mel, 
sanguis  uvae  et  oleum  et  vestis ; 
hagc  omnia  piis  ad  bona  sunt." 


286 


THE   CANON   OF  THE   CHURCH 


Eccli.   XXIII.   6. 

"Aufer  a  me  ventris  con- 
cupiscentias,  et  concubitus  con- 
cupiscentise  ne  apprehendant 
me,  et  animae  irreverenti  et 
infrunitae  ne  tradas  me. " 

Eccli.   XXIII.   25. 

''Omnis  homo  qui  trans- 
greditur  lectum  suum  contem- 
nens  in  animam  suam  et  dicens : 
quis  me  videt?  Tenebrae  cir- 
cumdant  me,  etparietes  coope- 
riunt  me,  et  nemo  circum- 
spicit  me;  quem  vereor?  De- 
lictorum  meorum  non  memor- 
abitur  Altissimus.  28. — et  non 
cognovit  quoniam  oculi  Domini 
multo  plus  lucidiores  sunt  su- 
per solem,  circumspicientes 
omnes  vias  hominum,  et  pro- 
fundum  abyssi,  et  hominum 
corda  intuentes  in  absconditas 
partes." 

Eccli.  XVIII.  30. 

"Post  concupiscentias  tuas 
non  eas,  et  a  voluntate  tua 
a  vert  ere." 

EccU.  XIX.  2-3. 

"Vinum  et  mulieres  aposta- 
tare  faciunt  sapient es,  et  ar- 
guent  sensatos,  et  qui  se  jungit 
fomicariis  erit  nequam;  putre- 
do  et  vermes  haereditabunt  il- 
ium." 

Eccli.  XI.  4. 

"In  vestitu  ne  glorieris  un- 
quam,  nee  in  die  honoris  tui 
extollaris." 


Clem.  Paed.  Lib.  II.  Cap.  X. 

"Quocirca  amove  a  servis 
tuis  spes  inanes  et  indecoras, 
inquit,  cupiditates  averte  a 
me.  Ventris  appetitio  et  coitus 
ne  me  apprehendant." 

Clem.  Paed.  Lib.  II.  Cap.  X. 

"Homo  qm  ascendit  super 
lectum  suum,  qui  dicit  in  ani- 
mo:  Quis  me  videt?  circa  me 
sunt  tenebrae,  et  parietes  stmt 
tegumentamea,etnemo  aspicit 
peccata  mea.  Quid  vereor, 
ne  meminerit  Altissimus  ?  .  .  .  . 
Nescit  enim,  Scriptura  dicit, 
oculi  Domini  Altissimi  quanto 
sint  soli  splendidiores  qui  re- 
spiciunt  omnes  vias  hominum, 
et  partes  occultas  intelligunt.  " 


Clem.  Paed.  Lib.  II.  Cap.  X. 

"Post  tua  desideria  ne  am- 
bules  et  acearis  a  tuis  appe- 
tionibus.  Vinum  enim  et  mu- 
lieres faciunt  sapientes  defi- 
cere,  et  qui  adhaeret  meretri- 
cibus  evadet  audacior.  Putre- 
do  et  vermis  erunt  ejus  haeredes 
et  efferetur  in  majori  ludi- 
brio." 


Ibid. 

"In  amictu  vestis  ne  glorie- 
ris, neque  in  omni  gloria  quae 
est  praster  leges  efferaris. " 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH 


287 


Eccli.  XXV.  8. 

''Corona  senum  multa  per- 
itia;  et  gloria  illonim,  timor 
Dei." 


Eccli.  IX.  7. 

"Noli  circumspicere  in  vicis 
civitatis,  nee  oberraveris  in 
plateis  illius." 

Eccli.  XI.  31. 

"Non  omnem  hominem  in- 
ducas  in  domum  tuam,  multae 
enim  sunt  insidiae  dolosi." 


Eccli.  IX.  22. 

"Viri  justi  sint  tibi  convivae, 
et  in  timore  Dei  sit  tibi  gloria- 
tio." 

Eccli.  XXI.  24. 

"Omamentum  aureum  pru- 
denti,  doctrina,  et  quasi  bra- 
chiale  in  brachio  dextro." 

Eccli.  XXVI.  12. 

"Fomicatio  mulieris  in  ex- 
tollentia  oculorum,  et  in  pal- 
pebris  illius  agnoscetur." 

Eccli.  IX.  8,  9. 

"Averte  faciem  tuam  a  mu- 
liere  compta,  et  ne  circum- 
spicias  speciem  alienam.  Prop- 
ter speciem  mulieris  multi  pe- 
rierunt,  et  ex  hoc  concupiscen- 
tia  quasi  ignis  exardescit." 


Clem.  Paed.  Lib.  III.  Cap. 
III. 

"Senum  autem  corona,  in- 
quit  Scriptura,  est  multa  ex- 
perientia. " 

Clem.  Paed.  Lib.  III.  Cap. 
IV. 

"Ne  circumspicias  autem, 
inquit,  in  vicis  civitatis,  nee 
erres  in  ejus  solitudinibus. " 

Ibid. 

* '  Unde  Scriptura  constan- 
tissime  admonet:  Ne  intro- 
ducas  quemvis  hominem  in 
domum  tuam;  dolosi  enim  ho- 
minis  multae  sunt  insidiae." 

Alibi  autem:  "Viri  justi, 
inqmt,  sint  tui  convivae,  et 
in  timore  Domini  tua  per- 
manebit  gloriatio. " 

Clem.  Paed.  Lib.  III.  Cap. 
XI. 

"Ut  vult  enim  Scriptura; 
Aureus  prudenti  mundus  est 
disciplina. " 

Ibid. 

"Fomicatio  autem  mulieris 
in   elevatione  oculorum." 

Ibid. 

"Averte  autem  oculum  a 
muliere  gratiosa,  et  ne  discas 
alienam  pulchritudinem,  inquit 
Scriptura;  et  si  causam  roges, 
ipsa  tibi  enarrabit:  In  pul- 
chritudine  enim  mulieris  multi 
seducti  sunt,  et  ex  ea  tam- 
quam  ignis  accenditur  ami- 
citia.  " 


288 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH 


Eccli.  I.  I. 

"Omnis  sapientia  a  Domino 
Deo  est,  et  cum  illo  fuit  sem- 
per, et  est  ante  aevum." 

Sap.  I.  7. 

"Quoniam  spiritus  Domini 
replevit  orbem  terranim." 

Sap.  VII.  17. 

"Ipse  enim  dedit  mihi  ho- 
rum  quae  sunt  scientiam 
veram,  ut  sciam  disposi- 
tionem  orbis  terrarum,  et 
virtutes  elementorum  .  .  .  dif- 
ferentias  virgultorum  et  vir- 
tutes radicum,  et  quaecumque 
sunt  absconsa  et  improvisa  di- 
dici;  omnium  enim  artifex  do- 
cuit  me  Sapientia." 

Eccli.  XV.  10. 

"Quoniam  a  Deo  profecta 
est  sapientia:  sapientiae  enim 
Dei  adstabit  laus,  et  in  ore 
fideli  abundabit." 

Tob.  IV.  16. 

"Quod  ab  alio  oderis  fieri 
tibi,  vide,  ne  tu  aliquando 
alteri  facias." 

Sap.  III.  I. 

"Justorum  autem  animse  in 
manu  Dei  sunt,  et  non  tanget 
illos  tormentum  mortis." 

Ibid. 

"Visi  sunt  oculis  insipien- 
tium  mori,  et  aestimata  est 
afflictio  exitus  eorum,  et  quod 
a  nobis  est  iter,  exterminium ; 
illi  autem  sunt  in  pace.  Etsi 
coram     hominibus  |/  tormenta 


Clem.  Strom.  Lib.  I.  Cap. 
IV. 

'  *  Quoniam  omnis  sapientia 
a  Domino,  et  cum  ipso  est  in 
saecula,  ut  dicit  Jesu  Sapien- 
tia." 

Clem.  Strom.  Lib.  I.  C  p.  II. 

"Dicit  itaque  in  Sapientia: 
Ipse  mihi  dedit  non  falsam 
eorum  quae  sunt  cognition  em, 
ut  cognoscam  mundi  consti- 
tutionem  .  .  .  .  et  vires  radicum 
.  .  .  .  et  quaecumque  sunt  oc- 
culta et  operta  cognovi;  quce 
est  enim  omnium  artifex  me 
docuit  Sapientia. " 

Clem.  Strom.  Lib.  II.  Cap.  V. 

"Merito  er^o  dictum  est 
apud  Salomonem:  Sapientia 
est  in  ore  fidelium.  " 

Ibid.  Cap.  XXIII. 

* '  Hoc  breviter  Scriptura  sig- 
nificavit  dicens:  Quod  odio 
habes,  alii  ne  feceris.  " 

Clem.  Strom.  Lib.  IV.  Cap. 
XL 

"Justorum  enim  animae  in 
manu  Dei  sunt,  et  non  tanget 
eas  tormentum." 

Ibid.  Cap.  XVI. 

''Divina  Scriptura  dicit  de 
martyrihus:  *Visi  sunt  oculis 
insipientium  mori,  et  reputata 
est  vexatio  eorum  exitus,  et  a 
nobis  discessus  contritio;  illi 
vero  sunt  in  pace.     Etenim  si 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH 


289 


passi  sunt,  spes  illonim  im- 
mortalitate  plena  est.  In  pau- 
cis  vexati,  in  multis  bene  dis- 
ponentur  quoniam  Deus  ten- 
tavit  eos,  et  invenit  illos  dignos 
se.  Tamquam  aurum  in  for- 
nace  probavit  illos,  et  quasi 
holocausti  hostiam  accepit  illos 
et  in  tempore  erit  respectus 
illorum.  Fulgebunt  justi,  et 
tamquam  scintillse  in  arundi- 
neto  discurrent.  Judicabunt 
nationes  et  dominabuntur  pop- 
ulis,  et  regnabit  Dominus  il- 
lorum in  perpetuum." 


in  oculis  hominum  suppliciis 
affecti  fuerint  spes  eorum  plena 
est  immortalitatis.  .  .  .  Et  in 
paucis  castigati,  magnis  affi- 
cientur  beneficiis,  quoniam 
Deus  tentavit  eos  ....  et  in- 
venit eos  se  dignos,  ut  scilicet 
vocentur  filii.  Tamquam  au- 
rum in  fomace  probavit  eos,  et 
tamquam  solidam  sacrificii 
oblationem  excepit  eos,  et  in 
tempore  inspectionis  eorum 
fulgebunt,  et  tamquam  scin- 
tillae  in  stipula  per  current. 
Judicabunt  gentes,  et  domina- 
buntur populis,  et  rex  eorum 
erit   Dominus   in   sascula. '" 


Eccli.  XXVII.  13. 

''In  medio  insensatorum, 
serva  verbum  tempori;  in  me- 
dio autem  cogitantium,  assi- 
duus  esto." 


Clem.   Strom.   Lib.   V.   3. 

"  In  medio  insipientium,  ob- 
serva  occasionem;  in  medio 
autem  cogitantium,  versare 
perpetuo." 


Sap.  VII.  24. 

"Omnibus  enim  mobilibus 
mobilior  est  sapientia;  attingit 
autem  ubique  propter  suam 
munditiam." 


Clem.  Strom.  Lib.  V.  Cap. 
XIV. 

"Quibus  illud  Sapientise  im- 
posuit:  Pervadit  autem  ac 
subit  per  omnia  propter  suam 
munditiam." 


Sap.  VI.  8. 

"Non  enim  subtrahet  per- 
sonam cujusquam  Deus,  nee 
verebitur  magnitudinem  cu- 
jusquam; quoniam  pusillum  et 
magnum  ipse  fecit,  et  aequaliter 
cura  est  illi  de  omnibus." 


Clem.  Strom.  Lib.  VI.  Cap. 
VI. 

"Non  enim  personam  res- 
picit  et  reveretur  qui  est  om- 
nium Dominus:  neque  curabit 
magnitudinem,  quoniam  ipse 
fecit  magnum  et  parvum,  et 
similitur  omnibus  providet,  et 
omnium  curam  gerit. " 


(19)  H.  S. 


290 


THE   CANON    OF    THE   CHURCH 


Sap.  IX.  17,  18. 

"Consilium  enim  tuum  quis 
sciet  ,  nisi  tu  dederis  sapien- 
tiam,  et  miseris  spiritum  sanc- 
tum tuum  de  Altissimis?  et  sic 
correctae  sint  semitae  eorum 
qui  sunt  in  terris  et  quae  tibi 
placent  didicerint  homines." 


Sap.  VI.  II. 

"Qui  enim  custodierint  jus- 
ta  juste  justificabuntur,  et  qui 
didicerint  ista  invenient  quid 
respondeant." 

Sap.  VII.  16. 

"In  manu  enim  illius  et  nos, 
et  sermones  nostri,  et  omnis 
sapientia,  et  operum  scientia 
et  disciplina.    " 

Ibid.  28. 

"Neminem  enim  diligit 
Deus,  nisi  eum  qui  cum  sapien- 
tia inhabit  at." 

Sap.  XIV.  2,  3. 

"lUud  enim  cupiditas  acqui- 
rendi  excogitavit,  et  artifex 
fabricavit  sapientia  sua.  Tua 
autem,  Pater,  providentia  gu- 
bernat — ." 


Clem.  Strom.  Lib.  VI.  Cap. 
XI. 

"Veritas  autem  per  Domin- 
um:  'Consilium  enim  tuum, 
inquit,  quis  novit,  si  non  tu 
dederis  sapientiam,  et  miseris 
sanctum  tuum  Spiritum  ab 
altissimis,  et  it  a  correctae  fu- 
erint  vise  eorum  qui  sunt  in 
terra,  et  didicerint  homines  ea 
quae  tibi  placent,  et  salvi  fue- 
rint  sapientia.'  " 

Ibid. 
"Qui    enim    sancta,    inquit, 
sancte    servant    sanctificabun- 
tur,  et  qui  ea  didicerent  inveni- 
unt  responsionem. " 

Ibid. 

"Et  rursus  licet  audire:  *In 
manu  enim  ejus,  hoc  est,  vir- 
tute  et  sapientia,  et  nos  et 
verba  nostra,  et  omnis  pru- 
dentia  et  operum  scientia.  Ni- 
hil enim  diligit  Deus  nisi  eum 
qui  cohabit  at  cum  sapientia. 
Praeterea  autem  non  legerunt 
quod  dictum  est  a  Salomone. 
Nam  cum  de  templi  construc- 
tione  tractasset,  aperte  dicit: 
Artifex  autem  construxit  sa- 
pientia; tua  autem,  Pater,  gub- 
ernat  providentia. ' " 


Sap.  VIII.  9. 

"Et  si  justitiam  quis  diligit, 
labores  hujus  magnas  habent 
virtutes,  sobrietatem  enim  et 
prudentiam  docet  et  justitiam 


Ibid. 

"Et  si  quis  diligit  justitiam, 
labores  ejus  sunt  virtutes ;  tem- 
perantia  enim  et  prudentia 
docet  justitiam  et  fortitudinem 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH 


291 


et  virtutem,  quibus  utilius 
nihil  est  in  vita  hominibus,  et 
nescienint  sacramenta  Dei.  .  . 
quoniam  Deus  creavit  homi- 
nem  inextemiinabilem,  et  ad 
imaginem  similitudinis  suae  fe- 
cit ilium." 

Tob.  XII.  8. 

"Bona  est  oratio  cum  je- 
junio,  et  eleemosyna  magis 
quam  thesauros  auri  recon- 
dere." 

Sap.  IV.  17. 

"Videbunt  enim  finem  sapi- 
entis,  et  non  intelligent  quid 
cogitaverit  de  illo  Deus,  et 
quare  munierit  ilium  Domi- 
nus." 

Ibid.  Cap.  V.   3. 

" — dicentes  intra  se,  poeni- 
tudine  acti  et  prae  augustia 
spiritus  gementes:  hi  sunt  quos 
habuimus  aliquando  in  deri- 
sum,  et  in  similitudinem  impro- 
perii;  nos  insensati  vitam  il- 
lorum  aestimabamus  insaniam, 
et  finem  illorum  sine  honore: 
ecce  quomodo  computati  sunt 
inter  filios  Dei,  et  inter  sanctos 
sors  illorum  est." 


Eccli.  XVIII.  8. 

"Numerus  dierum  hominum, 
ut  multum,  centum  anni ;  quasi 
gutta  aquae  maris  deputati  sunt, 
et  sicut  calculus  arenae,  sic  exi- 
gui  anni  in  die  aevi." 


quibus  nihil  est  in  vita  homini- 
bus utilius. " 


Clem.  Strom.  Lib.  Vi.  Cap. 
XII. 
"Sed,  ut  videtur,  Dei  non 
novere  mysteria,  quod,  scilicet, 
Deus  creavit  hominem  ob  im- 
mortalitatem,  et  fecit  eum 
imaginem  suae  proprietatis." 

Ibid. 

"  Exaudiens  Scripturam  quae 
dicit:  'Bonum  est  jejunium 
cum  oratione. '" 


Clem.  Strom.  Lib.  VI.  Cap. 
XIV. 

* '  Videbunt  enim  mortem  sa- 
pientis,  et  non  intelligent  quid 
de  eo  decreverit,  et  ad  quid 
eum  stabilierit  Dominus,  et 
dicent  de  ejus  gloria:  'Is  est 
quem  aliquando  habuimus  in 
derisum  et  in  parabolam  op- 
probrii  insipientes.  Vitam  ejus 
existimavimus  insaniam,  et 
mortem  ejus  ignominiosam. 
Quomodo  est  enumeratus  inter 
filios  Dei,  et  in  Sanctis  est  sors 
ejus.'" 

Ibid. 

''Reputati  sunt,  inquit,  ut 
pulvis  terrae,  et  ut  gutta  ex 
cado. " 


292 


THE   CANON    OF   THE   CHURCH 


Sap.  III.  9. 

"Qui  confidunt  in  illo,  intelli- 
gent veritatem,  et  fideles  in 
dilectione  acquiescent  illi." 


Sap.  III.  14. 

" — dabitur  enim  illi  fidei  do- 
num  electum,  et  sors  in  templo 
Dei  acceptissima." 


Sap.  VI.  13-21. 

"Clara  est  et  quae  nunquam 
marcescit  sapientia,  et  facile  vi- 
detur  ab  his  qui  diligiint  earn, 
et  invenietur  ab  his  qui  quaer- 
runt  illam.  Praeoccupat  qui  se 
concupiscunt  ut  illis  se  prior 
ostendat.  Qui  de  luce  vigilav- 
erit  ad  illam  non  laborabit,  as- 
sidentem  enim  ilium  foribus 
suis  inveniet.  Cogitare  ergo  de 
ilia  sensus  est  consummatus,  et 
qui  vigilaverit  propter  ilium 
cito  securus  erit.  Quoniam  dig- 
nos  se  ipsa  circuit  quaerens,  et 
in  viis  ostendit  se  illis  hilariter, 
et  in  omni  providentia  occurrit 
illis.  Initium  enim  illius  veris- 
sima  est  disciplinse  concupiscen- 
tia.  Cura  ergo  disciplinae  dilec- 
tio  est,  et  dilectio  custodia 
legum  illius  est;  custoditio  au- 
tem  legum  consummatio  in- 
corruptionis  est ;  incorruptio 
autem  f  acit  esse  proximum  Deo. 
Concupiscentia  itaque  sapien- 
tias  deducit  ad  regnum  perpe- 
tuum." 


Ibid. 

"Merito  ergo  dictum  est: 
*Et  qui  in  ipso  confidunt,  in- 
telligent veritatem,  et  fideles 
in  dilectione  in  ipso  permane- 
bunt.'" 

Ibid. 

"Ecce  enim  Salomon:  Dabi- 
tur enim  ei,  inquit,  fidei  gratia 
electa,  et  sors  in  templo  Do- 
mini jucundior. " 

Clem.  Strom.  Lib.  VI.  Cap. 
XV. 

"Salomon  haec  dicit:  'Clara 
est  et  non  marcescit  sapientia, 
et  facile  cemitur  ab  iis  qui 
ipsam  diligunt:  eos  qui  cupiunt 
praevenit,  ut  praecognoscatur. 
Qui  mane  surrexerit  ad  ipsam 
non  laborabit;  de  ipso  enim 
cogitare  est  perfectio  pruden- 
tiae.  Et  qui  propter  ipsam 
vigilaverit  cito  erit  cura  va- 
cuus; quoniam  eos  qui  ipsa 
digni  sunt,  ipsa  quaerens  cir- 
cuit, et  in  semitis  ab  ipsis  bene- 
vole  visione  apprehenditur.  * 
Mox  subjungit:  'Et  in  omni 
cogitatione  occurrit  ipsis  .... 
ejus  enim  principium  veris- 
simum  est  desiderium  disci- 
plinae, hoc  est,  cognitionis; 
cura  autem  disciplinae  est  di- 
lectio; dilectio  autem  est  ob- 
servatio  legum  ejus;  atten- 
tio  autem  legum  est  incorrup- 
tibilitatis  confirmatio ;  incor- 
ruptibilitas  autem  facit  ut 
ad  Deum  prope  accedatur. 
Sapientiae  ergo  desiderium 
attollit  ad  regnum.  *  " 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  CHURCH  293 

Clement  of  Alexandria  weaves  the  woof  of  his  fabric  from 
Scripture.  His  Paedogogus  could  be  properly  called  a 
commentary  on  Ecclesiasticus.  He  uses  the  deuterocanoni- 
cal  works  as  divine  Scripture ;  plainly  terms  them  so ;  and  was 
evidently  very  familiar  with  them.  As  he  was  the  cory- 
phaeus of  the  Alexandrian  church  in  that  age,  we  can  deduce 
from  his  line  of  action  that  the  great  Alexandrian  church  in 
the  age  succeeding  the  Apostles,  received  and  used  the  deu- 
terocanonical  books  with  equal  honor  as  the  books  of  the 
first  Canon. 

Tummg  from  the  master  to  his  greater  pupil,  Origen,  we 
find  him  to  have  prosecuted  the  same  line  of  teaching  as 
Clement.* 

*Origen  was  bom  of  Christian  parents  at  Alexandria  in  the  year  185, 
A.  D.  He  was  sumamed  Adamantius,  by  reason  of  his  indefatigable 
application  to  mental  toil.  The  vastness  of  his  erudition  is  not  surpassed 
by  that  of  any  of  the  Fathers  of  the  church.  He  was  taught  by  Clement 
of  Alexandria,  and,  at  the  age  of  eighteen,  was  given  the  charge  of  the  in- 
struction of  the  faithful  at  Alexandria.  To  preclude  the  taint  which  cal- 
umny strove  to  attach  to  his  name,  he,  by  means  of  a  drug,  destroyed  the  en- 
ergyof  his  generative  organs.  He  was  led  to  this  move  by  a  false  literal  in- 
terpretation of  the  praise  of  eunuchs  by  Christ,  in  the  Gospels.  Origen 
visited  Rome,  Palestine,  Greece,  Arabia  and  other  lands.  While  in  Pales- 
tine, he  was  deputed  by  the  bishops  to  explain  publicly  the  Holy  Scripture. 
Demetrius,  his  bishop,  objected  to  this,  on  the  grounds  that  it  was  not 
fitting  for  a  layman  to  teach  the  Holy  Scriptures.  Origen  was  after- 
wards ordained  priest  by  Theoctistus,  bishop  of  Csesarea  in  Palestine. 
Demetrius  then  deposed  Origin  on  the  grounds  that  he  was  a  eunuch, 
that  he  had  been  ordained  without  consent  of  his  own  bishop,  and  that  he 
had  taught  heresy.  Origen  was  obliged  to  retire  to  Caesarea  till  after  the 
death  of  Demetrius  in  231.  Under  Maximin  he  was  cast  into  prison  and 
treated  with  great  indignity.  It  is  charged  by  Epiphanius,  and  others, 
that,  to  escape  from  prison,  Origen  offered  incense  to  Serapis.  The  data 
are  wanting  to  establish  either  the  truth  or  falsity  of  this  imputation.  He 
died  at  Tyre  in  254.  To  Origen,  have  been  imputed  many  pernicious 
errors.  He  was  condemned  by  the  fifth  General  Council,  and  again,  Martin 
the  Fifth  anathematized  him  in  the  first  Council  of  Lateran  in  649.  In  that 
formative  period,  before  the  Christian  dogmas  became  moulded  with  the 
precision  and  definiteness,  which  the  natural  development  of  doctrine 
subsequently  gave  them,  when  men  strove  to  unite  the  philosophy  of  Plato 
with  the  divine  teachings  of  Christ,  it  was  not  strange  that  a  man  deeply 
imbued  with  Greek  thought,  should  in  good  faith,  have  advocated  theo- 
ries which  closer  investigation  found  to  be  untenable  in  the  Catholic 
Church.  Without  the  aid  of  divine  revelation,  it  would  be  strange  that  a 
man  should  write  so  much  on  the  subjects  on  which  Origen  wrote  and 
never  write  amiss.     These  errors  should  not  be  considered  as  a  malicious 


294  THE  CANON  OF  THE  CHURCH 

It  is  impossible  to  give  a  detailed  mention  of  his  many 
works.  Later  in  our  book  we  shall  treat  of  his  great  Hex- 
apla.  Other  of  his  chief  works  are:  Eight  Books  against 
Celsus,  De  Principiis  libri  qtiattuor,  and  Homilies  and  Com- 
mentaries on  Holy  Scripture. 

We  have  thought  good  to  transcribe  and  collate  many 
citations  from  Origen,  since  the  adversaries  of  the  deutero- 
canonical  books  have  alleged  his  authority  in  support  of  their 
curtailed  canon.  Nowhere  in  patristic  literature  do  we  find 
such  copious  and  apposite  use  of  Holy  Scripture  as  in  Origen. 
His  works  that  have  been  preserved  to  us  resemble  a  mosaic 
in  which  his  own  creations  serve  only  as  the  setting  in  which 
are  infixed  the  Scriptural  gems.  No  discrimination  is  made 
in  favor  of  the  books  of  the  first  canon.  He  rejects  and 
treats  with  irony  the  adoption  of  the  Jewish  canon.  In  his 
letter  to  Julius  Africanus*,  he  defends  the  deuterocanonical 
fragments  of  Daniel,  and  implies  that  the  canon  must  be 
sought  from  the  authority  of  the  Church,  and  not  from  the 
Jews:  ''Know,  therefore,  in  answer  to  these  things,  what 
should  be  our  line  of  action,  not  only  concerning  the  history 
of  Susanna,  which,  in  its  Greek  exemplar,  circulates  through 
the  whole  Church  of  Christ,  although  it  does  not  exist  with  the 
Hebrews',  and  not  only  concerning  the  other  parts,  which,  as 
you  have  said,  are  written  in  the  end  of  the  book,  namely, 
concerning  Bel  and  the  Dragon,  which  also  are  wanting  in  the 
Hebrew  text;  but  also  concerning  many  other  parts,  w^hich, 
while  we  compared,  according  to  our  powers,  the  Hebrew 

intent  to  infect  the  teachings  of  the  Church  but  an  evidence  of  the  defecti- 
bility  of  human  reason.  Origen  has  done  the  Church  invaluable  service, 
and,  though  not  ranked  with  the  Fathers,  he  will  always  be  appealed  to  in 
questions  which  need  the  testimony  of  tradition  for  their  solution. 


*Julius  Africanus  was  a  Christian  historian,  who  flourished  in  the  third 
century,  under  Heliogabalus.  He  was  of  Nicopolis,  in  Palestine.  He  is 
the  author  of  a  universal  history  from  Adam  down  to  Macrinus,  whose 
scope  was  to  prove  that  paganism  was  an  innovation.  Only  fragments  of 
the  work  are  preserved  to  us  by  Eusebius.  Africanus  controverted  the 
genuineness  of  the  history  of  Susanna,  concerning  which  he  wrote  to  Origen. 
One  of  his  most  celebrated  contributions  to  the  patrimony  of  science  is 
his  reconciliation  of  the  diverse  genealogies  of  Jesus  Christ  in  Matthew 
and  Luke. 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH  295 

with  our  own  text,  we  found  in  many  places."  Soon  he 
breaks  forth  into  irony:  ' 'Forsooth,  the  time  is  at  hand, 
if  we  have  discovered  these  things,  to  abrogate  the  exem- 
plars of  Holy  Scripture  of  our  churches,  and  impose  the  law 
upon  the  brethren  that,  rejecting  the  sacred  books  which 
they  have,  they,  by  adulation,  persuade  the  Jews  to  concede 
to  us  the  Scriptures  pure  and  devoid  of  figment.  ...  In 
relation  to  these  things,  consider  whether  it  be  not  good  to 
remember  the  saying:  Pass  not  beyond  the  ancient  boimds 
which  thy  fathers  have  set.  [Prov.  XXII.  28.]  And  I  say 
this,  not,  indeed,  that  I,  through  sloth,  refuse  to  examine  the 
Scriptures  which  the  Jews  have,  and  compare  them  with 
ours,  to  see  what  diversity  between  them  exists.  This, 
indeed,  if  it  be  not  arrogant  to  say,  we  have  diligently,  and, 
according  to  our  ability,  done ;  comparing  with  great  care  the 
editions,  and  observing  their  divergencies,  thus,  however, 
that  we  have  bestowed  somew^hat  more  labor  on  the  Septua- 
gint,  that  we  might  not  bring  anything  spurious  into  the 
Churches,  which  are  beneath  the  whole  heavens.  .  .  .  We 
endeavor  not  to  be  ignorant  of  the  Scriptures  w^hich  the  Jews 
have,  so  that,  discussing  with  them,  we  may  not  bring  forth 
those  things  which  are  wanting  in  their  exemplars,  and  we 
also  make  use  of  those  portions  which  are  found  with  them, 
and  are  not  in  our  books." 

Many  of  the  early  Fathers  w^ere  forced  to  meet  the  Jews 
on  their  own  ground,  and  thus  in  disputes  with  them,  to  use 
only  the  curtailed  canon  which  the  Jews  recognized.  Thus 
Jerome  [Praef.  on  Isaiah]  affirms:  ''May  He  give  me  my 
future  reward  who  knows  me  to  have  labored  and  sweat  in 
the  acquisition  of  this  foreign  tongue,  so  that  the  Jew^s  might 
not  longer  insult  the  Christians  on  the  charge  of  the  falsity 
of  their  Scriptures."  This  need  also  was  the  motive  for  the 
lists  drawn  up  by  some  of  the  Fathers,  in  which  the  deutero- 
canonical  books  were  exckided.  Even  Origen  himself  has 
made  such  list,  but  he  openly  declares  that  it  is  the  canon 
according  to  the  Hebrews.  The  Jews  by  their  ridicule  of  the 
deuterocanonical  books  may  have  led  some  individual  Fa- 
thers to  doubt  of  the  equality  of  inspiration  of  the  books  of 
the  second  canon.     As  the  rationalists  of  to-day  sometimes 


296  THE  CANON  OF  THE  CHURCH 

obtain  from  Catholics  unwarranted  concessions,  lest  they 
should  seem  to  be  ignorant,  so  those  other  earlier  enemies  of 
truth  may  have  diminished  in  the  minds  of  some  the  author- 
ity of  the  deuterocanonical  works.  This  they  certainly 
effected  in  the  mind  of  Jerome.  We  see  that  Africanus  re- 
jected the  deuterocanonical  fragments  of  Susanna.  Origen 
describes  the  existing  state  of  things  very  well  in  his  response 
to  Africanus.  The  complete  canon  circulated  throughout 
the  universal  Church;  the  Jews  and  some  few  individuals 
advocated  the  restricted  canon  of  the  Jews.  Origen  in  plain 
words  ridicules  the  theory  which  the  protestants  of  to-day 
advocate,  and  yet  they  would  claim  his  authority. 

Origen  endorses  Tobias  in  Hist.  Susannae,  13 :  "We  must 
know,  therefore,  that  the  Hebrews  use  neither  Tobias  nor 
Judith.  For  the  Hebrews  have  not  thes^  books  even  among 
the  Apocrypha,  as  we  ourselves  have  learned  from  them. 
But  since  the  Churches  use  Tobias,  we  must  know  that  also  in 
the  captivity  some  captives  were  opulent  and  prospered." 
Origen  essays  to  defend  the  book  of  Tobias,  not  that  the  He- 
brews acknowledge  it,  but  because  the  Churches  use  it. 

Two  things  result  for  us  from  Origen 's  testimonies.  First, 
that  the  usage  of  the  Churches  of  his  age  recognized  the 
divinity  of  the  deuterocanonical  books ;  and ,  second,  that  he 
considered  this  usage  a  criterion  of  inspiration.  He  can 
never  be  honestly  claimed  to  have  favored  the  protestant 
theory  of  accepting  the  canon  from  the  Jews. 

The  Canon  of  Origen  is  found  in  his  Commentary  on  the 
first  Psalm,  Parag,  I:  "The  twenty-two  books  according 
to  the  Hebrews  are  these."  The  first  which  is  called  by  us 
Genesis  is  termed  by  them,  from  its  opening  words,  Beresith 
which  signifies  "In  the  beginning."  Then  Exodus,  with 
Hebrews,  Vellesemoth,  interpreted,  "These  are  the  names." 
The  third,  Leviticus,  with  the  Hebrews,  Vajikra,  that  is, 
"And  he  called."  The  fourth,  Numbers,  with  the  Hebrews 
Hammisphecodim.*     The  fifth,  Deuteronomy,  with  the  He- 

*The  appellation  Hammisphecodim  for  the  book  of  Numbers  is  only- 
found  in  Origen.  Its  signification  is  unknown  to  us.  The  common 
designation  of  the  book  in  Hebrew  was  "^2^^  1»  "et  locutus  est." 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  CHURCH  297 

brews  Elle,  haddebarim,  that  is,  "these  are  the  words."  The 
sixth,  Jesus  the  son  of  Nave,  in  Hebrew,  Jehoshua  ben  Nun. 
The  seventh.  Judges  and  Ruth,  by  the  Hebrews  comprised 
in  one  volume,  which  they  call  Sophetim.  The  eighth  is  the 
first  and  second  book  of  the  Kingdoms,  which  with  them 
constitute  one  volume  which  is  called  Samuel,  that  is  "The 
called  of  God."  The  ninth  is  the  third  and  fourth  of  the 
Kingdoms,  which  they  also  comprise  in  one  volume  and  call 
Vammelech  David,  that  is,  "The  Kingdom  of  David."  The 
tenth  is  the  first  and  second  of  Paralipomenon,  by  them  com- 
prised in  one  volume,  which  they  call  Dibre  Haj  jamim,  that 
is,  "The  Words  of  the  Days."  The  eleventh  is  the  first  and 
second  of  Esdras,  w^hich  with  them  constitute  one  volume, 
which  they  call  Ezra,  that  is,  "The  Helper."  The  twelfth 
is  the  book  of  Psalms,  with  the  Hebrews  Sepher  Tehillim. 
The  thirteenth  is  tlie  Proverbs  of  Solomon,  with  the  Hebrews 
Misloth.  The  fourteenth  is  Ecclesiastes,  with  the  Hebrew 
Koheleth.  The  fifteenth  is  the  Canticle  of  Canticles,  with 
the  Hebrews  Sir  Hassirim.  The  sixteenth  is  Isaias,  with 
the  Hebrews  Jesaia.  The  seventeenth  is  Jeremias  with  the 
Lamentation  and  Epistle,  by  them  comprised  in  one  volume, 
which  they  call  Jirmia.  The  eighteenth  is  Daniel,  with  the 
Hebrews  Daniel.  The  nineteenth  is  Ezekiel,  with  the  He- 
brews Jeezhel.  The  twentieth  is  Job,  by  the  Hebrews,  desig- 
nated by  the  same  name.  The  twenty-first  is  Esther,  which 
is  also  thus  designated  by  the  Hebrews.  Outside  this  enum- 
eration are  the  books  of  Maccabees  which  are  inscribed 
"SarbetSarbaneel." 

In  this  list,  the  twelve  minor  Prophets,  by  the  Hebrews 
comprised  in  one  book,  are  omitted.  It  must  have  been, 
however,  through  inadvertence  on  the  part  of  Origen  or  the 
amanuensis,  since  this  book  was  never  doubted.  The  care 
bestowed  by  Origen  and  other  Fathers  in  preparing  these 
lists  was  for  the  purpose  of  fitting  the  Christians  to  meet 
the  Jews  on  common  grounds.  This  was  necessary  in  that 
age,  when  the  chief  intellectual  attacks  on  Christianity  came 
from  the  Jews.  The  following  collated  passages  will  illus- 
trate Origen 's  attitude  towards  the  deuterocanonical  w^orks : 


298 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH 


Tob.  I.  13-22. 

(Already  quoted.) 

Judith  XI.  Passim. 


Dan.  XIII. 

"Et  erat  vir  habitans  in 
Babylone,  et  nomen  ejus  Joa- 
kim,"  etc. 


Orig.  De  Hist.  Sus.  13. 
(Already  quoted.) 

Orig.  Frag.  Ex  Lib.  VL 
Strom. 

**Homo  autem,  cui  incumbit 
necessitas  mentiendi,  diligenter 
attendat  ut  sic  utatur  inter- 
dum  mendacio  quomodo  con- 
dimento  atque  medicamine,  ut 
servet  mensuram  ejus,  ne  ex- 
cedat  terminos  quihus  usa  est 
Judith  contra  Holophernem,  et 
vicit  prudenti  simulatione  ver- 
borum." 

Orig.  Ex  Lib.  Stromatum. 

"Et  erat  vir  habitans  in 
Babylone,  et  nomen  ejus  Joa- 
cim,  et  accepit  uxorem  nomine 
Susannam,  filiam  Helciae,  pul- 
chram  nimis  et  timentem  Dom- 
inum.  Et  parentes  ejus  justi 
edocuerunt  filiam  suam  juxta 
legem  Moysi. 

Hoc  utendum  est  testimonio 
ad  exhortationem  parentum, 
ut  doceant  juxta  legem  Dei 
sermonemque  divinum,  non  so- 
hxai  filios,  sed  et  filias  suas.  . .  . 

Quia    Hebraei    re- . 

probant  historiam  Susannae, 
dicentes  eam  in  Danielis  volu- 
mine  non  haberi,  debemus  in- 
quirere  nomina  ox'^^u,  xal  xptvou 
quae  Latini  ilicem  et  lentiscum 
interpretantur,  si  sint  apud 
Hebraeos,  et  quam  habeant 
etymologiam,  ut  a  oxfvw,,  scis- 
sio,  et  a  xpcvw,  sectio  sive  ser- 
ratio  dicatur  lingua  eorum. 
Quod  si  non  fuerit  inventum, 


THE   CANON    OF   THE   CHURCH 


299 


Sap.  VII.  25. 

"Vapor  est  enim  virtutis  Dei, 
et  emanatio  quaedam  est  clar- 
itatis  omnipotentis  Dei  sin- 
cera — " 


Ibid.  VII.  25,  26- 

Sap.  XVIII.  24. 

"In  veste  enim  poderis,  quam 
habebat,  totus  erat  orbis  terra- 
rum — . ' ' 

Eccl.  XLIII.  22. 
"Frigidus  ventus  aquilo   fla- 
vit— ." 

Eccli.  VI.  4. 

"Anima  enim  nequam  dis- 
perdet,  qui  se  habet." 

Sap.  XI.  21. 

" —  sed  omnia  in  mensura  et 
numero  et  pondere  disposuisti. ' ' 


necesitate  cogemur  et  nos 
eorum  acquiescere  sententiae, 
qui  Graeci  tantum  sermonis 
hanc  volunt  esse  xepixoxi^v,  quae 
Graecam  habeat  tantum  ety- 
mologiam,  et  Hebraicam  non 
habeat.  Quod  si  quis  ostende- 
rit  duarum  scissionis  et  sec- 
tionis  in  Hebraeo  stare  ety- 
mologiam,  tunc  poterimus 
etiam  hanc  Scripturam  reci- 
pere." 

Orig.  De  Principiis,  Lib.  I. 
Cap.  II. 

"Invenimus  nihilominus  in 
Sapientia,  quae  dicitur  Salom- 
onis,  descriptionem  quamdam 
de  Dei  Sapientia  hoc  Inodo 
scriptam:  'Vapor  est  enim,  in- 
quit,  virtutis  Dei  et  aiuoppoia 
gloriae  omnipotentis  puris- 
sima.'  " 

Ibid. 

Orig.  De  Princ.  Lib.  II.  Cap. 
III.  6. 

" —  sicut  in  Sapientia  Salo- 
monis  invenimus,  cum  dicit 
quia:  'In  vestimento  poderis 
erat  uni versus  mundus.'  " 

Orig.  Ibid.  Cap.  VIII.  3. 

" — sicut     scriptum     est     in 
Sapientia:      'Frigidus     ventus 
'  Boreas.'  " 

Ibid. 

"Anima  mala  perdit  eum  qui 
possidet  eam." 
Ibid.  Cap.  IX.  I. 

"Porro  autem,  sicutScriptura 
dicit:  *In  numero  et  mensura, 
uni  versa  condidit  Deus. — '  " 


300 


THE   CANON   OF   THE    CHURCH 


Sap.  VII.  i6. 

" — in  manu  enim  illius  et 
nos,  et  sermones  nostri,  et  om- 
nis  Sapientia  et  operum  scien- 
tia,  et  disciplina. " 

Eccli.  XVL  22. 
"Nam   plurima  illius   opera 
sunt  is  absconsis — ." 

Sap.  XL  i8. 

**Non  enim  impossibilis  erat 
omnipotens  manus  tua,  quae 
creavit  orbem  terrarum  ex 
materia  invisa,  immittere  illis 
multitudinem  ursorum,  aut  au- 
daces  leones — ." 


Orig.  DePrin,  Lib.  Ill  .14. 

"  'In  manu  enim  Dei,  et  nos, 
et  sermones  nostri,  et  omnis 
prudentia  atque  operum  dis- 
ciplina est'  sicut  Scriptura  di- 
citr 

Orig.  De  Prin.  Lib.  IV.  26. 

"Quia  scriptum  est:  *Quam- 
plurima  ex  operibus  Dei  in  sec- 
re  tis  sunt.'  " 

Ibid.  33. 

"In  Sapientia  quae  dicitur 
Salomonis,  qui  utique  liber  non 
ab  omnibus  in  auctoritate 
habetur.  Ibi  tamen  scriptum 
invenimus  hoc  modo:  *Non 
enim,'  inquit,  'deerat  omnipo- 
tenti  manu  tuae,  quae  creaverat 
mundum  ex  informi  materia, 
immittere  eis  multitudinem  ur- 
sorum vel  feroces  leones.'  " 

Origen  here  records  the  doubts  of  some,  without  making 
them  his  own.  Certain  individuals  have  doubted  concerning 
the  deuterocanonical  works;  the  Church  never  doubted.  In 
quoting  the  book  as  Scripture,  Origen  follows  the  Church. 
This  can  be  said  in  general ;  the  Fathers,  in  their  practical  use 
of  Scripture,  reflect  the  belief  of  the  Church.  If  they  put 
forth,  at  times,  speculative  doubts,  they  are  then  speaking  as 
fallible  individuals.  This  principle  has  been  recognized  by 
the  protest  ant  Davidson. 

"It  is  sometimes  said  that  the  history  of  the  Canon  should 
be  sought  from  definite  catalogues,  not  from  isolated  quota- 
tions. The  latter  are  supposed  to  be  of  slight  value;  the 
former  to  be  tlie  result  of  deliberate  judgment.  This  remark 
is  more  specious  than  sohd.  In  relation  to  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, the  catalogues  given  by  the  Fathers,  as  by  Meliton  and 
Origen,  rest  solely  on  the  tradition  of  the  Jews ;  apart  from 
which,  they  have  no  independent  authority.  As  none  ex- 
cept Jerome  and  Origen  knew  Hebrew,  their  lists  of  the  Old 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  CHURCH  301 

Testament  books  are  simply  a  reflection  of  what  they  learned 
of  others.  If  they  deviate  in  practice  from  their  masters  by 
quoting  as  Scripture  other  than  canonical  (protocanonical) 
books,  they  show  their  judgment,  overriding  an  external 
theory. 

"The  very  men  w^ho  give  a  list  of  the  Jewish  books,  evince 
an  inclination  to  the  Christian  and  enlarged  Canon.  Thus  the 
Fathers,  who  give  catalogues  of  the  Old  Testament,  show 
the  existence  of  a  Jewish  and  a  Christian  Canon  in  relation  to 
the  Old  Testament ;  the  latter  wider  than  the  former,  their 
private  opinion  more  favorable  to  the  one,  though  the  other 
was  historically  transmitted."  [Davidson,  Canon  of  the 
Bible,  p.  J 32.] 

This  last  clause  is  not  well  said.  It  is  not  the  private 
opinions  of  the  Fathers  that  constitute  the  basis  of  traditional 
proof  of  our  complete  Canon.  It  is  the  universal  usage  of 
the  Churches  of  the  Christian  people,  which  subjugated  even 
those  who  theoretically  were  disposed  to  doubt.  It  is  the 
belief  identical  with  the  life  of  the  Church  which  manifests 
itself  in  the  use  which  these  Fathers  made  of  Scripture.  As 
individuals  they  could  err  and  doubt ;  as  faithful  witnesses  of 
the  belief  of  the  Church,  they  hand  down  to  us  the  faith 
which  was  the  same  in  the  beginning,  is  now,  and  ever  shall 
be.  This  capacity  they  fulfill,  as  Davidson  rightly  says, 
when  quoting  the  Scriptures  as  they  were  familiar  to  the 
Christian  people.  Neither  is  Davidson  correct  in  saying 
that  the  curtailed  canon  of  the  Jews  was  historically  trans- 
mitted. If  he  means  by  this  that  the  restricted  canon  was 
transmitted  to  us  by  the  Jews,  it  is  well;  but  it  is  utterly 
false  to  say  that  the  existing,  recognized  Canon  of  Chris- 
tians were  such  Canon.  Impartial  historians,  such  as  Euse- 
bius,  record  the  doubts  of  isolated  churches  concerning  sev- 
eral books,  but  these  doubts  never  could  be  said  to  have  per- 
vaded the  whole  Church.  Such  a  critical  mind,  as  was  that 
of  Origen,  would  have  more  readily  tended  to  reject  the 
deuterocanonical  books,  had  he  not  been  convinced  by  the 
belief  and  usage  of  the  universal  Church.  As  Origen 's 
authority  is  most  valuable,  we  have  taken  the  trouble  to 
collate  many  passages : 


302 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH 


Sap.  IX.  13-16. 

"Qiiis  enim  hominum  poterit 
scire  consilium  Dei?  Aut  quis 
poterit  cogitare  quid  velit  Deus  ? 
Cogitationes  enim  mortalium 
timidae;  et  incertae  providen- 
tiae  nostrae ;  corpus  enim  quod 
corrumpitur  aggravat  animam, 
et  terrena  inhabitatio  deprimit 
sensum  multa  cogitantem,  et 
difficile  aestimamus  quae  in 
terra  sunt,  et  quae  in  prospectu 
sunt  invenimus  cum  labore. 
Quae  autem  in  coelis  simt,  quis 
investigabit?" 


Orig.  Lib.  De  Oratione,  I. 

"Quis  enim  homintun  poterit 
scire  consilium  Dei?  Aut  quis 
poterit  cogitare  quid  Deus 
velit?  Cogitationes  enim  mor- 
talium timidae ;  et  incertae  pro- 
videntiae  nostrae,  corpus  enim 
quod  corrumpitur  aggravat  ani- 
mam, et  terrena  inhabitatio 
deprimit  sensum  multa  cogit- 
antem; et  difficile  aestimamus 
quae  in  terra  sunt.  Quae  aut- 
em in  coelis  sunt,  quis  investi- 
gavit?" 


Sap.  XI.  25. 

"Diligis  enim  omnia  quae 
sunt,  et  nihil  odisti  eorum  quae 
f  ecisti — . ' ' 


Ibid.  5. 

" — dihgitque  omnia  quae 
sunt,  et  nihil  odit  eorum  quae 
fecit." 


Sap.  I.  7. 

"Quoniam   Spiritus    Domini 
replevit  orbem  terrarum." 


Ibid.  10. 

"Magis  idoneus  fit  commis- 
ceri  'Spiritui  Domini  qui  re- 
plevit orbem  terrarum.'  " 


Tob.  III.  24,  25. 

"In  illo  tempore  exauditae 
sunt  preces  amborum  in  con- 
spectu  gloriae  summi  Dei,  et 
missus  est  angelus  Domini, 
Sanctus  Raphael,  ut  curaret 
eos  ambos." 


Ibid.  II. 

"Quae  inde  patent,  quod  Ra- 
phael obtulerit  Deo  rationabile 
obsequium  Tobiae  et  Sarae. 
'Nam  postutriusqueorationem, 
exaudita  est,  inquit  Scriptura, 
deprecatio  utrorumque  coram 
gloria  magni  Raphael,  et  mis- 
sus est  ad  sanandum  ambos.'  " 


Tob.  XII.  12  (juxta  Grae- 
cum). 

"Ac  modo  cum  tu,  et  Sara 
nurus  tua  orastis,  memoriam 
precum  vestrarum  coram  Sanc- 
to  retuli." 


Ibid. 

"  *Et  nunc  quando  orasti  tu, 
et  nurus  tua  Sara,  ego  obtuli 
memoriale  orationis  vestrae  co- 
ram Sancto.'     Et  post   pauca 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH 


303 


Ibid.  15  (juxta  Graecum). 

"Ego  sum  Raphael,  unus  ex 
septem  Sanctis  Angelis  qui 
preces  sanctorum  ad  Deum  of- 
ferunt,  atque  ambulant  ante 
majestatem  Sancti." 

Ibid.  8  (juxta  Graecum). 

"Bonae  sunt  preces  quae 
cum  jejunio  et  beneficentia  jus- 
titiaque  conjunctae  sunt." 

II.  Maccab.  XV.  13-16. 

"Post  hoc  apparuisse  et  al- 
ium  virum  aetate  et  gloria  mir- 
abilem,  et  magni  decoris  habit- 
udine  circa  ilium;  responden- 
tem  vero  Oniam  dixisse:  Hie  est 
fratrum  amator,  et  populi  Is- 
rael: hie  est  qui  multum  orat 
pro  populo  et  universa  sancta 
civitate,  Jeremias propheta  Dei. 
Extendisse  autem  Jeremiam 
dexter  am,  et  dedisse  Judae  gla- 
dium  aureum  dicentem:  accipe 
sanctum  gladium,  munus  a  Deo 
in  quo  dejicies  adversarios 
populi  mei  Israel. " 

Judith  XIII.  9-10. 

"Cum que  evaginasset  ilium, 
apprehendit  comam  capitis  ejus, 
et  ait:  Confirma  me,  Dom- 
ine  Deus,  in  hac  hora;  et  per- 
cussit  bis  in  cervicem  ejus,  et 
abscidit  caput  ejus,  et  abstulit 
conopeum  ejus  a  columnis,  et 
evolvit  corpus  ejus  truncum." 

Judith  VIII.  22.  (juxta 
Graecum) . 

"Mementote  quae  cum  Abra- 
ham egerit,  quibusque  rebus 
Isaac  probarit,  quae  item  Jacob 


'Ego  sum  Raphael,  unus  ex  sep- 
tem Angelis  qui  offerunt  ora- 
tiones  sanctorum,  et  ingredi- 
untur  in  conspectu  gloriae 
Sancti.'  Itaque  juxta  Ra- 
phaelis  sermonem:  'Bonum  or- 
atio  cum  jejunio  et  eleemosyna 
et  justitia.'  Item  quod  Jere- 
mias, ut  in  Machabaeorum  lib- 
ris  habetur;  'apparuerit  canitie 
et  gloria  eximius,  ita  ut  mira- 
bilis  quaedam  et  maximi  de- 
coris fuerit  praestantia  circa 
ilium:  extenderitque  dexteram, 
et  dederit  Judae  gladium  au- 
reum, de  quo  testatus  est  alius 
sanctus  qui  ante  obierat:  Hie 
est  qui  multum  orat  pro  populo 
et  sancta  civitate,  Jeremias, 
propheta  Dei.'  " 


Orig.  De  Oratione,  13. 

"Judith,  Sanctis  oblatis  pre- 
cibus,  Holophemem,  Deo  adju- 
vante,  superavit,  et  una  He- 
braeorum  femina  labem  domui 
Nabuchodonosoris  inussit." 


Orig.  De  Orat.  29. 

"Recordamini  enim,"  ait  Ju- 
dith, "quaecumque  fecit  cum 
Abraham,  et  quaecumque  tent- 


304 


THE   CANON   OF  THE   CHURCH 


in  Mesopotamia  Syriae  pascenti 
oves  Laban  avtmculi  ipsius  ac- 
ciderint.  Etenim  sicut  illos  ex- 
periundi  cordis  ipsonim  gratia, 
ita  nos  probat,  et  non  ulcisci- 
tur;  sed  commonitionis  causa 
Dominus  castigat  eos  qui  ei  ap- 
propinquant." 

Sap.  XVI.  28. 

" —  ut  notum  omnibus  esset 
quoniam  oportet  praevenire  so- 
lem  ad  benedictionem  tuam,  et 
ad  ortum  lucis  te  adorare." 


Tob.XII.  12. 

(Already  quoted.) 

II.  Maccab.  VI.  19-31. 

"At  ille  gloriossimam  mortem 
magis  quam  odibilem  vitam 
complectens,  voluntarie  prasi- 
bat  ad  supplicium.  Intuens 
autem,  quemadmodum  oporte- 
ret  accedere,  pati enter  sustin- 
ens,  destinavit  non  admittere 
illicita  propter  vitae  amorem. 
Hi  autem,  qui  astabant,  iniqua 
miser atione  commoti,  propter 
antiquam  viri  amicitiam,  tol- 
lentes  eum  secreto  rogabant 
afferi  cames,  quibus  vesci  ei 
licebat,  ut  simularetur  mandu- 
casse,  sicut  rex  imperaverat  de 
sacrificii  camibus:  ut,  hoc  facto 
a  morte  liberaretur:  et  propter 
veterem  viri  amicitiam,  banc  in 
eo  faciebant  humanitatem.  At 
ille    cogitare    coepit  aetatis  ac 


avit  Isaac, et  qusecumque  even- 
erunt  Jacob  in  Mesopotamia 
Syriae  pascenti  pecora  Laban 
fratris  matris  suae,  quoniam 
sicut  illos  examinavit  in  certa- 
men  cordis  eorum,  etiam  nos 
ulciscitur,  quia  ad  emenda- 
tionem  flagellat  Dominus  ap- 
propinquantes  sibi." 

Ibid.  31. 

" —  et  de  parte  mundi,  in  Sa- 
pientia  Solomonis,  dicitur:  *Ut 
notum  esset,  quoniam  oportet 
praevenire  solem  ad  benedic- 
tionem tuam,  et  ante  ortum 
lucis  te  adorare.'  " 

Ibid. 

(Already  quoted.) 

Orig.  Exhortatio  ad  Martyr- 
ium,  22. 

"Quam  autem  aequius  est 
mortuum  laudari  quam  qui 
mortem  sponte  ac  libere  pro  re- 
ligione  oppetiit?  Qualis  fuit 
Eleazar,  qui  'gloriosissimam 
mortem  magis  quam  odibil- 
em vitam  complectens,  volun- 
tarie praeibat  ad  supplicium,' 
quique  'strenuam  assumens 
ratiocinationem  dignam  aetate 
sua  nonagenaria,  et  senectutis 
suae  eminentia,  illustrique  can- 
itie,  atque  optima  a  pueritia 
educatione,  maxime  vero  sanc- 
ta,  et  a  Deo  condita  lege  dixit: 
non  est  aetate  hac  nostra  dignum 
fingere,  ut  multi  adolescentes, 
arbitrantes  Eleazarum  nona- 
genta  annorum  transisse  ad  vi- 
tam alienigenarum,  et  ipsi  prop- 


THE   CANON    OF   THE   CHURCH 


305 


senectutis  suae  eminentiam  dig- 
nam,  et  ingenitae  nobilitatis 
canitiem,  atque  a  puero  opti- 
mae  conversationis  actus:  et  se- 
cundum sanctae  et  a  Deo  con- 
ditae  legis  constituta,  respondit 
cito,  dicens:  Prasmitti  se  velle 
in  infemum.  Non  enim  aetati 
nostrae  dignum  est,  inquit ;  fin- 
gere;  ut  multi  adolescentium, 
arbitrantes  Eleazarum  nonag- 
inta  annorum  transisse  ad  vi- 
tam  alienigenarum:  et  ipsi 
propter  meam  simulation  em,  et 
propter  modicum  corruptibilis 
vitae  tempus  decipiantur,  et  per 
hoc  maculam  atque  execra- 
tionem  meae  senectuti  conqui- 
ram.  Nam,  etsi  in  praesenti 
tempore  suppliciis  hominum 
eripiar,  sed  manum  Omnipo- 
tentis  nee  vivus,  nee  defunctus 
effugiam.  Quamobrem  fortiter 
vita  excedendo  senectute  qui- 
dem  dignus  apparebo;  adoles- 
centibus  autem  exemplum  forte 
relinquam,  si  prompto  animo, 
ac  fortiter  pro  gravissimis  ac 
sanctissimis  legibus  honesta 
morte  perfungar.  His  dictis, 
confestim  ad  supplicium  trahe- 
batur.  Hi  autem,  qui  eum  du- 
cebant,  et  paulo  ante  fuerant 
mitiores,  in  iram  conversi  sunt 
propter  sermones  ab  eo  dictos, 
quos  illi  per  arrogantiam  pro- 
latos  arbitrabantur.  Sed,  cum 
plagis  perimeretur,  ingemuit,  et 
dixit:  Domine,  qui  habes  sanc- 
tam  scientiam,  manifeste  tu 
scis,  quia,  cum  a  morte  possem 
liberari,  duros  corporis  sustineo 


ter  meam  simulationem,*  et 
propter  modicum  corruptibilis 
vitae  tempus  decipiantur  prop- 
ter me,  et  execrationem  atque 
maculam  senectuti  acquiram; 
nam  etsi  in  praesenti  tempore 
suppliciis  hominum  eripiar,  sed 
manus  Omnipotentis  nee  vivus 
nee  defunctus  effugiam.  Quam- 
obrem fortiter  excedendo  se- 
nectute quidem  dignus  appar- 
ebo, adolescentibus  autem  ex- 
emplum forte  relinquam,  ut 
prompto  animo  ac  fortiter  pro 
gravissimis  ac  sanctissimis  legi- 
bus honesta  morte  perfungan- 
tur.' 

Oro  autem  vos  cum  ad  por- 
tas  mortis  imo  libertatis  con- 
stituti  eritis,  maxime  si  tor- 
menta  objicientur,  dicere  Dom- 
ino, qui  sanctam  habet  scien- 
tiam: 'Manifestum  est  quia  cum 
a  morte  possem  liberari,  duros 
corporis  sustineo  dolores, secun- 
dum animam  vero  propter  ti- 
morem  ejus  libenter  haec  pa- 
tior.' 

Talis  ergo  fuit  Eleazari  mors, 
'qui  non  solum  juvenibus,  sed 
et  plerisque  suae  gentis  mortem 
suam  exemplum  fortitudinis  et 
memoriale  virtutis  leliquit.'  " 


(20)  H.  S. 


306 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH 


dolores:  secundum  animam 
vero  propter  timorem  tuum 
libenter  haec  patior.  Et  iste 
quidem  hoc  modo  vita  de- 
cessit,  non  solum  juvenibus,  sed 
et  universae  genti  memoriam 
mortis  suae  ad  exemplum  virtu- 
tis  et  fortitudinis  derelinquens. 

The  23d,  24th,  25th,  26th,  and  27th  numbers  of  the  Ex- 
hortatio  ad  Martyrium  are  a  commentary  on  the  death  of 
the  mother  and  her  seven  sons,  as  recorded  in  the  second 
book  of  Maccab.,  seventh  chapter,  and  he  concludes  by 
saying:  '*I  believe  that  I  have  selected  these  things  as 
most  useful  to  my  scope  from  the  Scriptures,  that  we  may 
see  how,  against  bitterest  tortures  and  heaviest  torments, 
pity  and  the  love  of  God,  mightier  than  any  other  love, 
can  avail. "  It  is  evident  that  the  faith  for  which  the  martyrs 
died  recognized  as  divine  Scripture  the  deuterocanonical 
books. 


Sap.  XV.  10. 

"Cinis  est  enim  cor  ejus,  et 
terra  super  vacua  spes  illius, 
et  luto  vilior  vita  ejus." 


Sap.   III.   6. 

"Tamquam  aurum  in  for- 
nace  probavit  illos,  et  quasi 
holocausti  hostiam  accepit  illos, 
et  in  tempore  erit  respectus 
illorum. " 


Orig.  Exhort,  ad  Martyr.  32. 

" — idque  postquam  cognovi- 
mus  'cinerem  esse  cor  idolis 
servientium,  vitamque  luto  tur- 
piorem.'  " 

Ibid.  35. 

"Quodsi  probatus  est  et  ille, 
et  qui  similes  illi  sunt;  quos 
'tamquam  aurum  in  fornace' 
tormentis  et  quaestionibus  'pro- 
bavit Dominus,  et  quasi  holo- 
causti hostiam  accepit.'  " 


Sap.  I.  4. 

' '  Quoniam  in  malevolam  ani- 
mam non  introibit  sapientia, 
nee  habitabit  in  corpore  sub- 
dito  peccatis. " 


Orig.  Contra  Celsum,  Lib.  III. 
60. 

"Quoniam  vero  docemus  'sa- 
pientiam  in  malevolam  ani- 
mam non  introituram,  nee  hab- 
itaturam  in  corpore  subdito 
peccatis.'  " 


THE   CANON    OF   THE    CHURCH 


307 


Sap.   VII.    25—26. 

''Vapor  est  enim  virtutis 
Dei,  et  emanatio  quaedam  est 
claritatis  omnipotentis  Dei  sin- 
cera:  et  ideo  nihil  inquinatum 
in  earn  incurrit;  candor  est 
enim  lucis  aeternae,  et  specu- 
lum sina  macula  Dei  majestatis 
et  imago  bonitatis  illius. " 

Sap.  I.  7. 

' '  Quoniam  spiritus  Domini 
replevit  orbem  terrarum:  et 
hoc,  quod  continet  omnia, 
scientiam  habet  vocis. " 


Orig.  Contra  Celsum,  Lib.  III. 
72. 

*' — aut  quomodo  ilium  di- 
vina  Scriptura  definit:  'vapor 
divinae  potestatis,  limpida  om- 
nipotentis ejus  gloriae  effluen- 
tia,  splendor  lucis  aeternae, 
speculum  sine  macula  Dei  ma- 
jestatis, et  imago  bonitatis  il- 
lius.' " 

Orig.  Contra  Celsum,  Lib.  IV. 

5- 
" —    nescit:    'Spiritum    Do- 
mini replere  orbem  terrarum,  et 
hoc  quod  continet  omnia  scien- 
tiam habere  vocis.'  " 


Sap.  XI.  25. 

"Diligis  enim  omnia  quae 
sunt,  et  nihil  odisti  eorum 
quae  fecisti:  nee  enim  odiens 
aliquid  constituisti,  aut  fe- 
cisti." 


Ibid.  18. 

"Legimus  ac  novimus: 
*Deum  diligere  omnia  quae 
sunt,  et  nihil  odisse  eorum  quae 
fecit;  nihil  enim  constiturum 
fuisse  quod  odisset.'  " 


Eccli.  XVIII.  12. 

" — misericordia  autem   Dei 
super  omnem  carnem. " 


Ibid. 

" —  et  misericordiam  Domini 
esse  super  omnem  carnem." 


Sap.  XII.  I.  Ibid.  37. 

"0  quam  bonus,   et  suavis  " — de  quo  dictum  est:  'In- 

est,   Domine,   spiritus  tuus  in  corruptibilis  autem  tuus  Spir- 

omnibus.  "  itus  est  in  omnibus.' " 


EccH.  XXXIX.  26. 

"Non  est  dicere:  Quid  est 
hoc,  aut  quid  est  istud?  omnia 
enim  in  tempore  suo  quaeren- 
tur. " 


Ibid.  75. 

"Ne  dixeris:  quid  hoc?  aut: 
quorsum  hoc?  omnia  enim  ad 
illorum  usum  creata  sunt.  Et 
ne  dixeris:  quid  istud  ?  aut  quor- 
sum istud  ?  omnia  enim  in  tem- 
pore suo  quaerentur." 


308 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH 


Tob.  XII.  7. 

*  *  Etenim  sacramentum  regis 
abscondere  bonum  est:  opera 
autem  Dei  revelare  et  confiteri 
honorificum  est." 


Sap.  X.  5. 

"Haec  et  in  consensu  ne- 
quitiae  justum,  et  conservavit 
sine  querela  Deo,  et  in  filii 
misericordia  fortem  custo- 
divit." 


Orig.  Contra  Celsum,  Lib.  V. 
19. 

"  'Quemadmodum,  et  apud 
Tobiam  legitur:  'Sacramentum 
regis  bonum  est  abscondere ;  sed 
opera  Dei  sincere  revelare.  .  . 
pulchrum  est.'  " 

Ibid.  29. 

**Sic  enim  ibi  de  sapientia: 
*Haec  et  in  consensu  nequitiae, 
cum  gentes  confusae  fuissent, 
scivit  justum,  et  conservavit 
sine  querela  Deo,  et  in  filii  mis- 
ericordia fortem  custodivit.'  " 


Tob.  XII.  7. 

(Already  quoted.) 

Sap.  I.  4. 

" —  quoniam  in  malevolam 
animam  non  introibit  sapien- 
tia, nee  habitabit  in  corpore 
subdito  peccatis. " 


Eccli.  XXI.  21. 

"Tamquam  domus  extermi- 
nata,  sic  fatuo  sapientia:  et 
scientia  insensati  inenarrabilia 
verba. " 

Sap.  IX.  6. 

*  *  Nam  et  si  quis  erit  consum- 
matus  inter  filios  hominum,  si 
ab  illo  abfuerit  sapientia  tua, 
in  nihilum  computabitur. ' ' 


Ibid. 

(Already  quoted.) 

Ibid. 

" — de  qua  pulchre  scriptum 
est:  'In  malevolam  animam 
non  introibit  sapientia,  nee  hab- 
itabit in  corpore  subdito  pec- 
catis.' " 

Orig.  Contra  Celsum,  Lib. 
VI.  7. 

"Modo  Jesu  Sirach  filius,  qui 
librum,  Sapientiam  (Sirach) 
inscriptum,  conscripsit:  'Scien- 
tia stulti,  sermones  inextrica- 
blies.' " 

Ibid.  13. 

"Nam  et  si  quis  erit  consum- 
matus  inter  filios  hominum,  si 
ab  illo  abfuerit  sapientia,  quae 
a  te  est,  in  nihilum  computa- 
bitur." 


Sap.  VII.   26. 

(Already  quoted.) 


Ibid.  63. 

(Already  quoted.) 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH 


309 


Sap.  XVII.   I. 

"Magna  sunt  enim  judicia 
tua  Domine,  et  inenarrabilia 
verba  tua:  propter  hoc  indis- 
ciplinatae  animae  erraverunt. " 

Sap.  I.  5. 

"Spiritus  enim  sanctus  dis- 
ciplinae  efifugiet  fictum,  et  au- 
feret  se  a  cogitationibus,  quae 
sunt  sine  intellectu,  et  corri- 
pietur  a  superveniente  iniqui- 
tate. " 

Eccli.  XXI.  21. 
(Already    quoted.) 

Sap.  XII.  1—2. 

'*0  quam  bonus,  et  sua  vis 
est,  Domine,  spiritus  tuus  in 
omnibus!  Ideoque  eos,  qui 
exerrant,  partibus  corripis:  et 
de  quibus  peccant,  admones  et 
alloqueris:  ut  relicta  malitia, 
credant  in  te,  Domine." 

Sap.  VII.  25—26. 
(Already  quoted.) 

Sap.   XVII.    I. 

I.  Maccab.  IX.  55;  II.  Mac- 
cab.  III.  24;  IX.  5. 


Eccli.  X.  23. 

* '  Semen  hominum  honora- 
bitur  hoc,  quod  timet  Deum: 
semen  autem  hoc  exhonorabi- 
tur,  quod  praeterit  mandata 
Domini. " 


Ibid.  79. 

"Verum  nihil  mirandum  est 
quoniam:  'Dei  judicia  magna 
sunt,  et  explicatu  ardua;  indis- 
ciplinatas  animas,'  adeoque  Cel- 
sum,  'errare.'  " 

Contra  Celsum,  Lib.  VIII.  8. 

"Spiritus  enim  sanctus  dis- 
ciplinae  effugiet  fictum,  et  au- 
feret  se  a  cogitationibus  quae 
sunt  sine  intellectu." 


Ibid.  12. 

(Already  quoted.) 

Ibid.  51. 

"Incorruptibilis  spiritus  tuus 
est  in  omnibus,  quapropter  de- 
linquentes  paulatim  arguit 
Deus." 


Orig.    Contra    Celsum,    Lib. 
VIII.  14. 
(Already  quoted.) 
Ibid.  32. 

Ibid.  46. 

" — et  alii  qui,  Judaeorum 
cultum  violare  in  templo  ausi 
fuerint,  referunt  Machabaeorum 
libri." 

Ibid.  50. 

"Hoc  docet  divina  Scrip tura: 
'Ecquod  semen  in  honore?  se- 
men hominis;  ecquod  semen  in 
contemptu?  semen  hominis.'  '' 


310 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH 


Eccli.  X.  4. 

"In  manu  Dei  potestas  ter- 
rae:  et  utilem  rectorem  sus- 
citabit  in  tempus  super  illam.  " 

Sap.  I.   13. 

' '  Quoniam  Deus  mortem  non 
fecit,  nee  laetatur  in  perditione 
vivonim. " 

Sap.   VIII.    2. 

"Hanc  amavi,  et  exquisivi 
a  juventute  mea,  et  quaesivi 
sponsam  mihi  eam  assumere, 
et  amator  factus  sum  formae 
illius." 

Sap.  VIII.  2. 

(Already  quoted.) 


Eccli.  XXII.  24. 
*  *  Pungens    oculum    deducit 
lacrymas:   et   qui   pungit   cor, 
profert  sensum. " 

Sap.  II.   20. 

"Morte  turpissima  condem- 
nemus  eum:  erit  enim  ei  res- 
pectus  ex  sermonibus  illius." 

Baruch  III.  9. 

"Audi,  Israel,  mandata  vitae 
auribus  percipe,  ut  scias  pru- 
dentiam. " 

Eccli.  VII.  40. 

"In  omnibus  operibus  tuis 
memorare  novissima  tua,  et 
in  aetemum  non  peccabis. " 


Ibid.  68. 

" — qui  que  utilem  rectorem 
suscitat  in  tempus  super  ter- 
ram." 

Orig.  Selecta  in  Genesim. 

"Deus  enim  mortem  non 
fecit,  nee  delectatur  in  perdi- 
tione vivorum." 

Orig.  Homilia  VI.  in  Gene- 
sim. 

" — si  cut  et  ille  sapiens  qui 
dicebat  de  sapientia:  'Hanc 
quaesivi  adducere  mihi  spon- 
sam.' " 


Homilia  XI.  in  Genesim,  i. 

"Sicut  et  ille  qui  dicebat  de 
sapientia:  'Hanc  ego  cogitavi 
uxorem  adducere  mihi.'  " 

"Orig.  in  Exodum,  Homilia 
IV.  5. 

"Pro  illo  vero  alia  Scriptura 
dicit:  'Punge  oculum,  et  produ- 
cit  lacrymam;  punge  cor,  et 
producit  sensum.'  " 

Hom.  VI.  in  Exodum,  i. 

"De  quo  etiam  Propheta 
praedixerat:  'Morte  turpissima 
condemnemus  eum.'  " 

Hom.  VII.  in  Exod.  2. 

"Sicut  et  alibi  (Scriptura) 
dicit;  'Audi,  Israel,  mandata 
vitae.'  " 

Hom.  IX.  in  Exod.  4. 
"Memor  esto  novissimorum 
tuorum,  et  non  peccabis." 


THE    CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH 


311 


Dan.  XIII.  22—23. 

"Ingemuit  Susanna,  et  ait: 
Angustiae  sunt  mihi  undique: 
si  enim  hoc  egero,  mors  mihi 
est:  si  autem  non  egero,  non 
effugiam  manus  vestras.  Sed 
meHus  est  mihi  absque  opere 
incidere  in  manus  vestras, 
quam  peccare  in  conspectu 
Domini." 


Sap.  I.  7. 

' '  Quoniam  spiritus  Domini 
replevit  orbem  terrarum:  et 
hoc,  quod  continet  omnia, 
scientiam  habet  vocis. " 

Sap.  VIII.  20. 

'  *  Et  cum  essem  magis  bonus 
veni  ad  corpus  incoinquina- 
tum." 


EccU.  XXVIII.  22. 

"Multi  ceciderunt  in  ore 
gladii,  sed  non  sic  quasi  qui 
interierunt  per  Hnguam  suam.  " 

Sap.  VII.  20 

" —  naturas  animaHum,  et 
iras  bestiarum,  vim  ventorum, 
et  cogitationes  hominum,  et 
virtutes  radicum." 


Hom.  I.  in  Leviticum,  i. 

"But  it  behooves  us  to  use 
against  the  impious  presbyters 
the  words  of  the  blessed  Susan- 
na, which  they  indeed  repudiat- 
ing, have  cut  off  from  the  cata- 
logue of  divine  Scripture  the  his- 
tory of  Susanna.  But  we  re- 
ceive it,  and  appositely  adduce 
it  against  them,  saying:  'I  am 
straitened  on  every  side :  for  if  I 
do  this  thing  (follow  the  letter 
of  the  Law)  it  is  death  to  me; 
and  if  I  do  it  not,  I  shall  not 
escape  your  hands.  But  it  is 
better  for  me  to  fall  into  your 
hands  without  doing  it  than  to 
sin  in  the  sight  of  the  Lord.'  " 

Hom.  V.  in  Leviticum,  2. 

"Et  iterum  alibi:  'Spiritus 
enim  Domini  replevit  orbem 
terrarum.'  '' 

Hom.  XII.  in  Levit.  4. 

"Ipse  (Jesus)  enim  erat  qui 
et  dudum  per  Salomonem  dixe- 
rat:  'Magis  autem  cum  essem 
bonus,  veni  ad  corpus  incoin- 
quinatum. ' ' 

Orig.  Hom.  VIII.  in  Nume- 
ros,  I. 

"Non  legisti?  'Dicunt  quia 
vulnerant  gladii  sed  non  ita  ut 
lingua?'  " 

Hom.  XII.  in  Numeros,  i. 

" — de  quorum  scientia  dice- 
bat  ille  qui  repletus  est  sapien- 
tia  Dei:  'Ipse  enim  mihi  dedit 
eorum  quae  sunt  scientiam  ve- 
ram,    ut    scirem    substantiam 


312 


THE   CANON   OF   THE    CHURCH 


Sap.  VII.  lo. 

(Already  quoted.) 

Sap.  VII.  22 — 23. 

*' —  est  enim  in  ilia  spiritus 
intelligentiae,  sanctus,  unicus, 
multiplex,  subtilis,  disertus, 
mobilis,  incoinqtiinatus.  certus, 
sua  vis,  amans  bonum,  acutus, 
quern  nihil  vetat,  benefaciens, 
humanus,  benignus,  stabilis, 
certus,  securus,  omnem  habens 
virtutem,  omnia  prospiciens, 
et  qui  capiat  omnes  spiritus, 
intelligibilis,  mtmdus,  subtilis. " 


mundi  et  elementorum  virtu- 
tem, initium  et  finem  et  medie- 
tatem  temporum,  vicissitudi- 
nem,  permutationes  et  commu- 
tationes  temporum,  anni  circu- 
los,  et  astrorum  positiones,  na- 
turas  animalium,  et  iras  bestia- 
rum,  spirituum  violentias  et 
cogitationes  hominum,  differ- 
entias  virgultorum,  et  virtutes 
radicum.'  " 

Ibid. 

(Already  quoted.) 

Orig.  Hom.  in  Numeros, 
XVII.  6. 

" — quia  et  spiritus  sapien- 
tiae,  qui  intelligibilis  et  sanctus 
et  unicus  et  multiplex  dicitur, 
similiter  et  subtilis  esse  perhi- 
betur." 


Eccli.    I.    I. 

"Omnis  sapientia  a  Domino 
Deo  est,  et  cum  illo  fuit  sem- 
per, et  est  ante  aevum. " 


Hom.  XVIII.  in  Numeros,  3. 

"In  libro,  qui  apud  nos  qui- 
dem  inter  Salomonis  volumina 
haberi  solet,  et  Ecclesiasticus 
dici,  apud  Graecos  vero  Sapien- 
tia Jesu  filii  Sirach  appellatur, 
scrip tum  est:  'Omnis  sapientia 
a  Deo  est.'  " 


Eccli.  XIX.  19 

"Et  non  est  sapientia  ne- 
quitiae  disciplina:  et  non  est 
cogitatus  peccatorum  pruden- 


Ibid. 

"Non    est     enim     sapientia 
malitiae  disciplina." 


tia. 


THE   CANON   OF   THE    CHURCH 


313 


Sap.  III.   i6. 

"Filii  autem  adulterorum  in 
inconsummatione  erunt,  et  ab 
iniquo  thoro  semen  extermina- 
bitur." 

Eccli.  XVI.  5. 

"Ab  uno  sensato  inhabitabi- 
tur  patria,  tribus  impiorum 
deseretur. ' ' 

Sap.  IX.  15. 

"Corpus  enim,  quod  corrum- 
pitur,  aggravat  animam,  et  ter- 
rena  inhabitatio  deprimit  sen- 
sum  multa  cogitantem. " 

Eccli.   XIV.    23. 

"Qui  excogitat  vias  illius 
in  corde  suo,  et  in  absconditis 
suis  intelligens,  vadens  post 
illam  quasi  investigator,  et  in 
viis  illius  consistens — .  " 


Hom.  in  Numeros  XX.  2. 

" —  de  quibus  scriptum  est: 
'Filii  autem  adulterorum  imper- 
fecti  erunt,  et  ex  iniquo  concu- 
bitu  semen  exterminabitur. '  " 

Hom.  XXI.  in  Num.  2. 

"Denique  et  scriptum  est: 
Per  unum  sapientem  inhabita- 
bitur  ci vitas;  tribus  autem  ini- 
quorum   desolabitur. '  " 

Hom.  XXIII.  in  Num.  11. 

"  'Corpus  enim  corruptibile,' 
ut  ait  ille  sapientissimus,  'ag- 
gravat animam,  et  deprimit 
sensum  multa  cogitantem.'  " 

Hom.  XXVIII,  in  Num.  i. 

"Sed  et  ego  qui  lego  de  sapi- 
entia  scriptum:  'Exi  post  eam 
sicut  investigator — .'  " 


Eccli.  II.  I. 

"Fili,  accedens  ad  servitu- 
tem  Dei,  sta  in  justitia,  et 
timore,  et  praepara  animam 
tuam  ad  tentationem. " 

Dan.  XIII.  56. 

"Et,  amoto  eo,  jussit  venire 
alium,  et  dixit  ei:  Semen  Cha- 
naan,  et  non  Juda,  species 
decepit  te,  et  concupiscentia 
subvertit  cor  tuum  — .  " 

Eccli.  III.  20. 

"Quanto  magnus  es,  humilia 
te  in  omnibus,  et  coram  Deo 
invenies  gratiam  — .  " 


Orig.  Hom.  XL  in  Joshua,  2. 

"Sed  et  Salomon  similia  di- 
cit:  'Fili,'  inquit,  'accedens  ad 
servitutem  Domini,  praepara 
animam  tuam  ad  tenta- 
tionem.' " 

Hom.  XXII.  in  Joshua,  6. 

" — Cui  dicitur  a  Propheta, 
'Semen  Chanaan  et  non  Juda, 
species  seduxitte.'  " 


Hom.  XXIV.  in  Joshua,  2. 

" — quod  dicitur:  'Quanto 
magnus  es  tanto  magis  humilia 
te,  et  ante  Dominum  invenies 


314 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH 


Ibid.    XXXII.    I. 

' '  Rectorem  te  posuerunt  ? 
noli  extolli:  esto  in  illis  quasi 
unus  ex  ipsis. " 

Eccli.  X.  15. 

" —  quoniam  ab  eo,  qui 
fecit  ilium,  recessit  cor  ejus; 
quoniam  initium  omnis  peccati 
est  superbia — .  " 

Eccli.  XXV.  3,  4. 

"Tres  species  odivit  anima 
mea,  et  aggravor  valde  animae 
illorum:  pauperem  superbum: 
divitem  mendacem :  senem 
fatuum  et  insensatum. " 

Judith  XIII. 


Eccli.  XXVII.   12. 

"Homo  sanctus  in  sapientia 
manet  si  cut  sol:  nam  stultus 
sicut  luna  mutatur. " 

Eccli.   III.   22. 

"Altiora  te  ne  quaesieris, 
et  fortiora  te  ne  scrutatus 
fueris:  sed  quae  praecepit  tibi 
Deus,  ilia  cogita  semper,  et 
in  pluribus  operibus  ejus  ne 
fueris  curiosus. " 


gratiam,'  et  iterum  quod  script- 
um  est:  'Si  te  ducem  ordina- 
verint,  ne  extollaris,  sed  esto 
inter  eos  quasi  unus  ex  ipsis.'  " 

Orig.  Hom.  III.  in  Judic.  i. 

' ' — quia  sicut  Scriptura  dicit : 
'Initium  discedendi  a  Domino, 
superbia — .'  " 

Ibid. 

"Nihil  invenies  tam  foedum 
neque  execrabile,  sicut  Scrip- 
tura dicit,  quam  'pauperem  su- 
perbum et  divitem  menda- 
cem.' " 

Hom.  IX.  in  Judic.  i. 

"Quid  ego  illam  magnificam 
et  omnium  feminarum  nobilis- 
simam  memorem,  Judith,  quae 
jam  perditis  pene  rebus,  non 
dubitavit  sola  succurrere,  sese- 
que  suumque  caput  immanis- 
simi  Holophernis  neci  sola  sub- 
jicere,  et  processit  ad  bellum 
non  in  armis,  neque  in  equis 
bellicis  aut  in  subsidiis  militari- 
bus  fret  a,  sed  in  virtute  animi ; 
et  confidentia  fidei,  consilio  si- 
mul  et  audacia  hostem  peri- 
mit." 

Orig.  Hom.  I.  in  Reg.  4. 

" — quia  et  secundum  Scrip- 
turas:  'insipiens  sicut  luna  mu- 
tatur.'  " 

Hom.  II.  in  Reg.  4. 

"Nam  et  Salomon  dicit:  'Al- 
tiora  te  ne  quaesieris,  et  for- 
tiora te  ne  scrutere,  sed  de  qui- 
bus  tibi  praeceptum  est,  haec 
intellige.'  " 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH 


315 


Eccli.  I.   II. 

"Timor  Domini  gloria,  et 
gloriatio,  et  laetitia,  et  corona 
exultationis. " 


Sap.  V.  i8— 21. 

"Accipiet  armaturam  zelus 
illius,  et  armabit  creaturam 
ad  ultionem  inimiconim.  In- 
duct pro  thorace  justitiam,  et 
accipiet  pro  galea  judicium  cer- 
tum;  sumet  scutum  inexpugn- 
abile  aequitatem,  acuet  au- 
tem  duram  iram  in  lanceam, 
et  pugnabit  cum  illo  orbis  ter- 
rarum  contra  insensatos." 

Dan.  XIII.  25  et  seqq. 

*  *  Cumque  duceretur  ad  mor- 
tem, suscitavit  Dominus  spiri- 
tum  sanctum  pueri  junioris, 
cujus  nomen  Daniel. " 


Orig.  Selecta  in  Ps.  XXI.  32. 

"  Genera tio  autem  Sapientiae 
est  secundum  Salomonem:  'ti- 
mor  Domini,  divitias,  gloria  ac 
vita.'  " 

SelectainPs.  XXXIV.  2. 

"Accipiet  armaturam  zelum 
illius,  et  armabit  creaturam  ad 
ultionem  inimicorum.  Induct 
pro  thorace  justitiam,  et  acci- 
piet pro  galea  judicium  certum, 
sumet  scutum  inexpugnabile 
aequitatem,  acuet  autem  du- 
ram iram  in  lanceam." 


Hom.  IV.  in  Ps.  XXXVI.  2. 

"Respice  beatum  Daniclem, 
qui  a  puero  et  prophetiae  gra- 
tiam  meruit,  et  iniquos  arguens 
presbytcros,  puer  coronam  jus- 
titiae  et  castitatis  obtinuit." 


Sap.  V.   4- 

"Nos  insensati  vitam  illo- 
rum  aestimabamus  insaniam, 
et  finem  illorum  sine  honore. " 

Esther  XIV.  11. 

"Ne  tradas,  Dominc,  scep- 
trum  tuum  his,  qui  non  sunt, 
nc  rideant  ad  ruinam  nostram: 
sed  converte  consilium  eorum 
super  cos,  et  cum,  qui  in  nos 
cocpit  saevire,  dispcrde." 

Eccli.  VIII.  6. 
*  *  Nc  despicias  hominem  avcr- 
tentem    se    a    peccato,    neque 


Hom.  V.  in  Ps.  XXXVI.  5. 

'* — ^ita  ut  illi  qui  in  pocnis 
sunt,  videntes  cos  in  gloria  di- 
cent:  Nos  stulti  vitam  eorum 
putabamus  insaniam." 

Ibid. 

"Et  in  libro  Esther  dicitur: 
*Non  tradas,  Dominc,  scep- 
trum  tuum  his  qui  non 
sunt.'  " 


Hom.  II.  in  Ps.  XXXVII.  i- 

" — nee  memores    Scripturas 

sunt  divinae  diccntis:   'Noli  im- 


316 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH 


improperes  ei;  memento  quo- 
niam  omnes  in  correptione 
sumus. " 

Eccli.   XXVIII.   28,  29. 

"Sepi  aures  tuas  spinis,  lin- 
guam  nequam  noli  audire,  et 
ori  tuo  facito  ostia,  et  seras. 
Aurum  tuum  et  argentum 
tuum  confla,  et  verbis  tuis 
facito  stateram,  et  frenos  ori 
tuo  rectos — . 

Eccli.  XXIII.  2, 

**Qtiis  superponet  in  cogi- 
tatu  meo  flagella,  et  in  corde 
meo  doctrinam  sapientiae,  ut 
ignorationibus  eonim  non  par- 
cant  mihi,  et  non  appareant 
delicta    eorum?" 


Eccli.  XXI.  29. 

"In  ore  fatuonim  cor  illo- 
nim:  et  in  corde  sapientium 
OS  illorum. " 

Eccli.  XV.  9. 

"Non  est  speciosa  laus  in 
ore  peccatoris — . ' ' 

Sap.  I.  4. 

* '  — quoniam  in  malevolam 
animam  non  introibit  sapien- 
tia,  nee  habitabit  in  corpore 
subdito  peccatis. " 


properare  homini  convertenti 
se  a  peccato,  sed  memor  esto 
quoniam  omnes  sumus  in  cul- 
pis.'  " 

Hom.  I.  in  Ps.  XXXVIII.  3. 

"Alibi  quidem  scriptum  est: 
'Vide,  circumduc  sepem  spina- 
rum  circa  possessionem  tuam.' 
Et  iterum:  'Pecuniam  tuam  et 
aurum  tuum  alliga,  et  ori  tuo 
facito  ostium  et  seram,et  verbis 
tuis,  jugum  et  stateram.'  " 

Hom.  II.  in  Ps.  XXXV.  III.  7. 

"Sed  novi  ego  et  alia  flagella 
quibus  vehementius  cruciamur, 
ilia  scilicet  quae  per  prophetam 
describit  sapientia  (prophetam 
enim  eum  dico) :  'Quis  dabit  in 
cogitatu  meo  correptionem  sa- 
pientiae, ut  ignorationibus  meis 
quae  feci  non  parcatur,  et  pec- 
catameanon  praetereantur?' " 

Orig.  Selecta  in  Ps.  LI.  Vers. 

4- 
" — in  ore  stultorum  cor  eo- 
rum est." 

Selecta  in  Ps.  LXV.  Vers.  2. 
" — quia  non  est  speciosa  laus 
in  ore  peccatoris." 

Selecta  in  Ps.   LXXXVIIL 

Vers.  32. 
"Qui  non  custodit  mandata 
Dei  desivit  esse  thronus  Dei, 
nam:  *In  malevolam  animam, 
non  introibit  sapientia,  neque 
habitabit  in  corpore  subdito 
peccatis.'  " 


THE   CANON   OF   THE    CHURCH 


317 


Sap.  I.  4. 

(Already  quoted.) 

Eccli.  XXVII.   12. 

"Homo  sanctus  in  sapientia 
manet  sicut  sol:  nam  stultus 
sicut  luna  mutatur. ' ' 

Baruch   III.   38. 

* '  Post  haec  in  terris  visus  est, 
et  cum  hominibus  conversatus 
est." 

Eccli.  XV.  9. 

(Already  quoted.) 

Sap.   VII.    25. 

(Already  quoted.) 
Sap.  IV.  13 

"Consummatus  in  brevi,  ex- 
plevit  tempora  multa — .  " 


Sap.  VIII.  2. 

"Hanc  amavi,  et  exquisivi 
a  juventute  mea,  et  quaesivi 
sponsam  mihi  eam  assumere, 
et  amator  factus  sum  formae 
illius." 

Eccli.  I.  33. 

"Fili,  concupiscens  sapien- 
tiam,  conserva  justitiam?  et 
Deus  praebebit  illam  tibi. " 


Sap.  XI.   27.   27— XII.   I. 

* '  Parcis  autem  omnibus : 
quoniam  tua  sunt,  Domine,  qui 
amas  animas.    O  quam  bonus. 


Selecta  in  Ps.  CXVIII.  Vers. 
155- 
(Already  quoted) . 
Selecta  in  Ps.  CXX.  Vers.  6. 
" — Stultusut  luna  mutatur." 


Selecta  in  Ps.  CXXV.  Vers. 
2. 

"Post  haec  enim  in  terra  vi- 
sus est,  et  cum  hominibus  con- 
versatus est." 

Selecta  in  CXLIX.  Vers.  i. 
(Already  quoted.) 

Orig.  Fragmenta  in  Pro  v.  I. 
2. 

(Already  many  times  quoted.) 

Ibid.  Cap.  XXX. 

" — siquidem  'in  brevi  con- 
summatus,  explevit  tempora 
multa.'  " 

Orig.  Prologus  in  Canticum 
Cantic. 

"Sed  et  in  eo  libello  qui  dici- 
tur  Sapientia  Salomonis  ita 
scrip tum  est  de  ipsa  sapientia: 
'Amator  factus  sum  decoris 
ejus.'  " 

Ibid. 

" — et  intelligere  illud  quod 
scriptum  est:  'Concupisti  sa- 
pientiam?  serva  mandata,  et 
Dominus  dabit  eam  tibi.'  " 

Orig.  in  Cant.  Cantic.  Lib. 
III.     Vers.  4. 

" — quam  vis  verum  sit  ut  di- 
citur  ad  eum:  'Parcis  autem 
omnibus,  quia  omnia  tua  sunt 


318 


THE    CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH 


et  sua  vis  est,  Domine,  spiritus 
tuus  in  omnibus." 


Sap.  VII.  17 — 20. 

(Already   quoted.) 

Eccli.  XXVIII.  29. 

"Aurum  tuum  et  argentum 
tuum  confia,  et  verbis  tuis 
facito  stater  am,  et  frenos  ori 
tuo  rectos — ." 

Eccli.  IV.  33. 

"Pro  justitia  agonizare  pro 
anima  tua,  et  usque  ad  mortem 
certa  pro  justitia,  et  Deus  ex- 
pugnabit  pro  te  iminicos  tuos. " 

Sap.   VII.    22. 

" —  est  enim  in  ilia  spiritus 
intelligentiae,  sanctus,  unicus, 
multiplex,  subtilis,  disertus, 
mobilis — . ' ' 

Sap.  I.  13,  14,  et  II.  24. 

*  *  Quoniam  Deus  mortem  non 
fecit,  nee  laetatur  in  perditione 
vivorum.  Creavit  enim,  ut 
essent  omnia:  et  sanabiles 
fecit  nationes  orbis  terrarum: 
et  non  est  in  illis  medicamen- 
tum  exterminii,  nee  inferorum 
regnum  in  terra.  Invidia  au- 
tem  diaboli  mors  introivit  in 
orbem   terrarum — . ' ' 

Eccli.   XXI.    18. 

"Verbum  sapiens  quodcum- 
que  audierit  scius  laudabit, 
et  ad  se  adjiciet — . " 

Eccli.  XXVIII.  2. 
(Already   quoted.) 


Domine,  amator  animarum. 
Spiritus  enim  incorruptionis  est 
in  omnibus.'  " 

Ibid.  Vers.  9. 

(Already  quoted.) 

Ibid.  Cap.  VII.  Vers.  8. 

" — ^juxta  illud:  'Ori  tuo  fac 
ostium,  et  vectem,  et  verbis 
tuis  fac  modum  et  stateram.'  " 

Ibid.  Cap.  VIII.  6. 
"Et  usque  ad  mortem  certa 
pro  justitia." 


Hom.  VI.  in  Isaiam,  5. 

"Dicitur  enim  de  S.  Spiritu, 
qui  est  secundum  sapientiam, 
quia  sit  multifarius,  tenuis,  mo- 
bilis." 

Hom.  II.  in  Jeremiam  I. 

"  'Deus  mortem  non  fecit, 
neque  delectatur  in  perditione 
viventium.  Creavit  enim  ut  es- 
sent omnia,  et  salutares  gene- 
rationes  mundi,  nee  est  in  eis 
venenum  mortis,  neque  inferni 
regnum  super  terram.'  Deinde 
paululum  ultra  procedens  in- 
venio  unde  sit  mors:  'Invidia 
autem  diaboli,  mors  intravit 
in  orbem  terrarum.'  " 

Hom.  VI.  in  Jerem.  i. 

"Quoniam  vero:  'Verbum 
sapiens  si  audierit  scius,  lauda- 
bit, et  ad  illud  adjiciet.'  " 

Ibid.  2. 

(Already  quoted.) 


THE    CANON   OF   THE    CHURCH 


319 


Baruch  III.  9 — 13. 

''Audi,  Israel,  mandata 
vitae:  auribus  percipe,  ut  scias 
prudentiam.  Qtiid  est,  Israel, 
quod  in  terra  in  micorum  es  ? 
inveterasti  in  terra  aliena,  coin- 
quinatus  es  cum  mortuis;  de- 
putatus  es  cum  descendentibus 
in  infernum.  Dereliquisti  fon- 
tem  sapientiae;  nam  si  in  via 
Dei  ambulasses,  habitasses 
utique  in  pace  sempiterna." 


Hom.  Vll.  in  Jerem.  3. 

" — et  abire  in  terram  de  qua 
scrip  turn  est:  'Audi,  Israel, 
quid  est  quod  in  terra  inimico- 
rum  es?  Computatus  es  cum 
descendentibus  in  infernum ; 
dereliquisti  fontem  vitas,  Dom- 
inum:  in  via  Dei  si  ambulasses, 
habitasses  utique  in  pace  in 
saeculum.'  " 


Sap.  III.  II. 

**Sapientiam  enim,  et  dis- 
ciplinam  qui  abjicit,  infelix  est: 
et  vacua  est  spes  illorum,  et 
labores  sine  fructu,  et  inutilia 
opera  eorum. " 

Eccli.  XXXI.  10. 

"Qui  probatus  est  in  illo 
et  perfectus  est,  erit  illi  gloria 
aeterna:  qui  potuit  transgredi, 
et  non  est  transgressus:  facere 
mala,  et  non  fecit — . " 


Hom.  VIII.  in  Jerem.  i. 

"  'Sapientiam  autem  et  dis- 
ciplinam  qui  abjicit,  infelix  est, 
et  vana  spes  ejus,  et  labores 
ejus  insensati,  et  inutilia  opera 
ejus,'  ait  Sapientia,  quae  dicitur 
Salomonis." 

Selecta  in  Jerem.  Cap.  II.  32. 

"Gloria  enim  aeterna  super 
caput  justorum.'^ 


Baruch  III.  10,  11. 

"Quid  est,  Israel,  quod  in 
terra  inimicorum  es  ?  invetera- 
sti in  terra  aliena,  coinquinatus 
e;s  cum  mortuis:  deputatus  es 
cum  descendentibus  in  infer- 
num." 


Ibid.  Cap.  XXXI.  16. 

" Scrip tum  est  in  Baruch: 
'Quid  est  quod  in  terra  inimi- 
corum es,  et  coinquinatus  es 
cum  mortuis?'  " 


Sap.  III.   I. 

"Justorum  autem  animae  in 
manu  Dei  sunt,  et  non  tanget 
illos  tormentum  mortis." 


Ibid.  Cap.  XLV.  5. 

" — Nam  'justorum  animae  in 
manu  Dei  sunt.'  " 


320 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH 


Eccli.   I.   2. 

"Arenam  maris,  et  pluviae 
guttas,  et  dies  saeculi  quis 
dinumeravit  ?  Altitudinem 

cceli,  et  latitudinem  terras, 
et  profundum  abyssi  quis  di- 
mensus  est?  " 

Eccli.  VII.  6. 

"Noli  quaerere  fieri  judex, 
nisi  valeas  virtute  irrumpere  ini- 
quitates:  ne  forte  extimescas 
faciem  potentis,  et  ponas  scan- 
dalum  in  aequitate  tua." 


Dan.  XIII.  56. 

"Et,  amoto  eo,  jussit  venire 
alium,  et  dixit  ei:  Semen  Cha- 
naan,  et  non  Juda,  species  de- 
cepit  te,  et  concupiscentia  sub- 
vertit  cor  tuum — ." 

Eccli.  X.  9,  10. 

"Avaro  autem  nihil  est  sce- 
lestius.  Quid  superbit  terra  et 
cinis:'  Nihil  est  iniquius  quam 
amare  pecuniam;  hie  enim  et 
animam  suam  venalem  habet: 
quoniam  in  vita  sua  projecit 
intima  sua." 

Eccli.  III.  20. 

"Quanto  magnus  es,  humilia 
te  in  omnibus,  et  coram  Deo  in- 
venies  gratiam. — " 

Sap.  VI.  7. 

"Exiguo  enim  conceditur 
misericordia:  potentes  autem 
potenter  tormenta  patientur." 


Orig.  Hom.  IV.  in  Ezechiel,  2. 

"Arenam  maris  et  pluviae 
stillas  et  dies  saeculi,  quis  dinu- 
merabit?  Altitudinem  coeli  et 
latitudinem  terrae  et  profun- 
dum Sapientiae,  quis  investi- 
gabit?" 

Hom.  V.  in  Ezech.  4. 

" — et  ante  oculos  mihi  pro- 
ponens  ilium  judicii  ordinem 
qui  in  Scripturis  continetur, 
recordor  dicti  illius:  'Pondus 
ultra  te  ne  leves.'  Sed  et  illud: 
'Noli  quaerere  fieri  judex,  ne 
non  valeas  auferre  iniqui- 
tates.'  " 

Hom.  VI.  in  Ezech.  3. 

"Saepe  miratus  sum  id  quod 
dictum  est  a  Daniel  ad  presby- 
terum  peccatorem,  cui  pro  pec- 
cato  nomen  imponens:  'Se- 
men,' in  quit  'Chanaan  et  non 
Juda.'  " 

Hom.  IX.  in  Ezech.  2. 

"Quid  enim  ait  Scriptura? 
'Quid  superbit  terra  et  cinis?' 
et:  'In  vita  ejus  projecit  intera- 
nea  ejus.'  " 


Ibid. 

" — dicente  Scriptura: 
'Quanto  magnus  fuerit,  tanto 
humilia  te  ipsum.'  " 

Hom.  X*  in  Ezech.  2. 

"Justum  est  quippe  judicium 
Dei,  et  'potentes  potenter  tor- 
menta patiuntur.'  " 


THE   CANON   OF   THE    CHURCH 


321 


Eccli.  XVIII.  30. 

'Tost  concupiscentias  tuas 
non  eas,  et  a  voluntate  tua 
avertere." 

Eccli.  XXVII.  12. 

"Homo  sanctus  in  sapientia 
manet  si  cut  sol:  nam  stultus 
sicut  luna  mutatur. ' ' 


Esther  XIV.  2. 

"Cumque  deposuisset  vestes 
regias,  fletibus  et  luctui  apta 
indumenta  suscepit — ." 

Sap.  VII.  26. 

(Already  quoted). 

Eccli.  XXVII.  28. 

"Qui  in  altummittitlapidem, 
super  caput  ejus  cadet:  et  plaga 
dolosa  dolosi  dividet  vulnera." 

Sap.  II.  21,  22. 

"Haec  cogitaverunt,  et  erra- 
verunt:  excaecavit  enim  illos 
malitia  eorum.  Et  nescierunt 
sacramenta  Dei — ." 

Sap.  VIII.  I. 

"Attingit  ergo  a  fine  usque 
ad  finem  fortiter,  et  disponit 
omnia  suaviter." 

Eccli.  IV.  33. 

"Pro  justitia  agonizare  pro 
anima  tua,  et  usque  ad  mortem 
certa  pro  justitia,  et  Deus  ex- 
pugnabit  pro  te  inimicos  tuos." 


Orig.    Comment,    in    Math. 
Tom.  XII.  22. 

"Post    concupiscentias   tuas 
non  eas." 


Ibid.  Tom.  XIII.  4. 

"Nobis  .  .  .  proderit  is  qui  in 
Sapientia  de  justi  quidem 
aequabilitate  et  constantia  ait: 
'Narratio  pii  semper  est  sapien- 
tia ..  .  stultus  autem  sicut  luna 
mutatur.'  " 

Ibid.  20. 

"Simile  in  libro  Esther  dic- 
tum esse  de  illo,  inquies,  cum 
scriptum  est:  'Cum  deposuisset 
omnem  omatum  suum.'  " 

Ibid.  Tom.  XV.  10. 
(Already  quoted). 

Ibid.  Tom.  XVI.  3. 

"Nam  'qui  in  altum  mittit 
lapidem,  in  caput  suum  mit- 
tit.' " 

Ibid. 

" — quoniam  'excaecavit  illos 
malitia  eorum,  et  nescierunt  sa- 
cramenta Dei.'  " 


Ibid. 

" — cum,  'attingit  a  fine  ter- 
rae  usque  ad  finem  fortiter,  et 
disponit'  ecclesias  'suaviter.'  " 

Ibid.  Tom.  XVII.  25. 

" — illudque  dogma  obser- 
vantes:  'Usque  ad  mortem 
certa  pro  veritate,  et  Deus 
pugnabit  pro  te.'  " 


(21)  H.  S. 


322 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH 


Sap.  VIII.  2. 

"Hanc  amavi,  et  exquisivi  a 
juventute  mea,  et  qusesivi 
sponsam  mihi  earn  assumere,  et 
amator  factus  sum  formae 
illius." 

Eccli.  III.  20. 

**Quanto  magnus  es,  humilia 
te  in  omnibus,  et  coram  Deo  in- 
venies  gratiam — ." 


Eccli.  XXI.  2. 

"Quasi  a  facie  colubri  fuge 
peccata:  et  si  accesseris  ad  ilia, 
suscipient  te." 

Eccli.  IX.  4. 

"Cum  saltatrice  ne  assiduus 
sis:  nee  audias  illam,  ne  forte 
pereas  in  efficacia  illius." 

Eccli.  XXI  2. 

(Already  quoted.) 


Dan.  XIII.  55. 

"Dixit  autem  Daniel;  Recte 
mentitus  es  in  caput  tuum: 
Ecce  enim  Angelus  Dei,  accepta 
sententia  ab  eo,  scindet  te  me- 
dium." 

Sap.  IX.  6. 

"Nam  et  si  quis  erit  consum- 
matus  inter  filios  hominum,  si 
ab  illo  abfuerit  sapientia  tua, 
in  nihilum  computabitur. " 

Sap.  VII.  17-20. 

(Already  quoted.) 


Ibid.  32. 

"Mulier  quidem  dicta  est 
Sapientia  propter  illud:  'Quae- 
sivi  sponsam  mihi  eam  assu- 
mere.' " 

Orig.  in  Math,  Comment.  Se- 
ries, 12. 

" — cum  deberent  recordari 
Sapientiae  verbum  dicentis : 
'Quantum  magnus  es,  tantum 
humilia  te,  et  coram  Deo  inve- 
nies  gratiam.' "     (Oft  quoted.) 

Ibid.  42. 

" —  et  quod  ait  Sapientia: 
'Quasi  a  facie  serpentis,  fuge 
peccatum.'  " 

Ibid.  44. 

"Cum  saltatrice  noli  assiduus 
esse,  ne  forte  consumaris  in  de- 
sideriis  ejus." 

Ibid. 

"Ideo  bene  dixit  Scriptura: 
'Quasi  a  facie  serpentis,  fuge 
peccatum.'  " 

Ibid.  61. 

" — quoniam  Angelus  Deus; 
habens  gladium,  scindet  te 
medium." 


Ibid.  69. 

" — quod  ait  Salomon:  'Et  si 
fuerit  quis  perfectus  inter  filios 
hominum,  si  abfuerit  ab  illo 
Sapientia  tua  in  nihilum  repu- 
tabitur.'  " 

Orig.  Hom.  XXI.  in  Lucam. 
(Already  quoted.) 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH 


323 


II.  Maccab.  VII.  28. 

"Peto,  nate,  ut  aspicias  ad 
coelum  et  terrain,  et  ad  omnia 
quae  in  eis  sunt:  et  intelligas, 
quia  ex  nihilo  fecit  ilia  Deus,  et 
hominum  genus." 

Esther  XIV.  11. 

(Already  quoted.) 

Judith,  IX.  2. 

"Domine  Deus  patris  mei 
Simeon,  qui  dedisti  illi  glad- 
ium  in  defensionem  alienigena- 
rum — ." 

Baruch  III.  38. 

(Already  quoted.) 

Eccli.  XVIII.  6. 

"Cum  consummaverit  homo, 
tunc  incipiet:  et  cum  quieverit, 
aporiabitur. ' ' 


Sap.  XVII.  I. 

"Magna  sunt  enim  judicia 
tua,  Domine,  et  inenarrabilia 
verba  tua:  propter  hoc  indisci- 
plinatae  animae  erraverunt." 

Sap.  VII.  26. 

(Oft  quoted.) 

I.  Maccab.  I.  22,  23. 

" — et  ascendit  Jerosolymam 
in  multitudine  gravi.  Et  intra- 
vit  in  sanctificationem  cum  su- 
perbia,  et  accepit  altare  aureum 
et  candelabrum  luminis, 
et  uni versa  vasa  ejus,  et  men- 
sam  propositionis,  et  libatoria, 
et  phialas,  et  mortariola  aurea, 


Orig.  Comment,  in  Joannem, 
Tom.  I.  18. 

"Secus  vero  apud  nos  est,  qui 
credimus  ex  non  entibus  Deum 
entia  fecisse,  ut  mater  ilia  sep- 
tem  Martyrum  in  Machabaeo- 
rum  gestis,  et  poenitentiae  an- 
gelus  in  Tastore'  docuit." 

Ibid.  Tom.  11.  7. 

(Already  quoted.) 

Ibid.  16. 

"Verum  Eliae  profecto  etiam 
est  Deus,  et,  ut  inquit  Judith, 
patris  sui  Symeon . " 

Ibid.  Tom.  VI.  15. 
(Already  quoted.) 

Ibid.  19. 

"  'Quoniam  cum  absolvent 
homo,  tunc  incipit;  et  quum 
quieverit,  tunc  incertus  erit,' 
juxta  Jesu  filii  Sirach  Sapien- 
tiam." 

Ibid.  36. 

"  'Magna  enim  judicia  Dei,' 
eaque  aegre  nee  facile  narran- 
tur,  atque  'ob  hanc  causam 
rudes  animae  erraverunt.'  " 

Ibid.  37. 

(Oft  quoted.) 

Ibid,  Tom.  X.  22. 

"Apparet  etiam  apud  Mac- 
chabaica,  multam  inconstan- 
tiam  et  confusionem  fuisse, 
circa  templum  et  circa  popu- 
lum— ." 


324 


THE   CANON   OF    THE   CHURCH 


et  velum,  et  coronas,  et  oma- 
mentum  aureum,  quod  in  facie 
templi  erat:  et  comminuit  om- 
nia." 

Eccli.   III.    22. 

"Altiora  te  ne  quaesieris,  et 
fortiora  te  ne  scrutatus  fue- 
ris.— " 

Sap.  25,  26. 

(Oft  quoted.) 

Eccli.  XXI.  18. 

"Verbum  sapiens  quodcum- 
que  audierit  scius  laudabit,  et 
ad  se  adjiciet — ." 

II.  Maccab.  XV.  14. 

"Respondentem  vero  Oniam 
dixisse:  Hie  est  fratnim  ama- 
tor,  et  populi  Israel:  hie  est, 
qui  multum  orat  pro  populo,  et 
universa  sancta  civitate  Jere- 
mias,  propheta  Dei." 

Dan.  XIII.  42. 

"Exclamavit  autem  voce 
magna  Susanna,  et  dixit:  Deus 
aeteme,  qui  absconditorum  es 
cognitor,  qui  nosti  omnia  ante- 
quam  fiant — ." 

Sap.  VII.  9. 

" — nee  comparavi  illi  lapi- 
dam  pretiosum ;  quoniam  omne 
aurum  in  comparatione  illius, 
arena  est  exigua,  et  tamquam 
lutum  aestimabitur  argentum 
in  conspectu  illius." 

Sap.  X.  3,  4. 

"Ab  hac  ut  recessit  in  Justus 
in  ira  sua.  per  iram  homicidii 
fratemi  deperiit.  Propter  quem 


Ibid.  Tom.  XIII.  5. 
"Te  difficiliora  ne  quaeras,  et 
te  fortiora  ne  vestiga." 

Ibid.  27. 

(Oft  quoted.) 

Ibid.  46. 

" — quoniam  autem  *si  ser- 
monem  sapientem  audierit  sa- 
piens, laudabit  eum,  et  ad  ipsum 
addet— .'  " 

Ibid.  57. 

'* — quemadmodum  in  Mach- 
abaeorum  gestis  scriptum  est, 
post  plurimos  annos  ab  obitu 
Jeremiae:  *Hic  est  Jeremias, 
Dei  Propheta,  qui  multum  orat 
pro  populo.'  " 

Ibid.  58. 

"Quomodo  etiam  servat  il- 
lud:  'Qui  videt  omnia  ante  or- 
tum  ipsorum.'  " 


Ibid.  Tom.  XIX.  2. 

"Sapientia  siquidem  erat 
qui  vis  ejus  sermo,  de  qua  dici- 
tur:  *Omne  aurum  coram  sa- 
pientia  est  pauca  arena ;  et  ceu 
coenum  reputabitur  argentum 
coram  ea.*  " 

Ibid.  Tom.  XX.  4. 

"Sapientiae  liber,  Salomoni 
inscriptus,  his  verbis  docet: 
'Recedens  autem  ab  ipsa,  in- 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH 


325 


cum  aqua  deleret  terrain,  sana- 
vit  iterum  sapientia,  per  con- 
temp  tibile  lignum  justum  gu- 
bemans." 

Sap.  X.  7. 

" — quibus  in  testimonium 
nequitiae  fumigabunda  constat 
deserta  terra,  et  incerto  tem- 
pore fructus  habentes  arbores, 
et  incredibilis  animae  memoria 
stans  figmentum  salis." 

Dan.  XIII.  56. 

(Oft  quoted.) 

Sap.  XII.  II. 

"Semen  enim  erat  maledic- 
tum  ab  initio:  nee  timens  ali- 
quem,  veniam  dabas  peccatis 
illorum." 

Sap.  II.  24. 

"Invidia  autem  diaboli,  mors 
introivit  in  orbem  terrarum." 

Sap.  VIII.  2. 

"Hanc  amavi,  et  exquisivi  a 
juventute  mea,  et  quaesivi 
sponsam  mihi  eam  assumere, 
et  amator  factus  sum  formae 
illius." 

Eccli.  V.  8. 

"Non  tardes  converti  ad  Do- 
minum,  et  ne  differ  as  de  die  in 
diem." 

Dan.  XIII.  9  et  35. 

" — et  everterunt  sensum 
suum,  et  declinaverunt  oculos 
suos  ut  non  viderent  coelum, 
neque  recordarentur  judicio- 
rum  justorum. 


Justus  in  ira  sua  periit  cum  ani- 
mis  fratricidis,  per  quem  in- 
undatam  terram  rursus  serva- 
vit  Sapientia,  vili  ligno  justum 
gubemans.'  .  .  .  ' — quorum  eti- 
amnum  malitiae  .testimonio  fu- 
mosum  restat  solum,  et  plant ae 
intempestivum  fructum  fer- 
entes.'  " 


Ibid.  5. 

(Oft  quoted.) 

Ibid. 

" — dicente  Sapientia:  'Se- 
men execratione  devotum  ab 
initio.'  " 

Ibid.  21. 

"Sic  'Invidia  mors  introivit 
in  mundum.'  " 

Ibid.  33. 

" — qui  dicit:  'Amator  factus 
sum  pulchritudinis  illius.'  " 


Ibid.  Tom.  XXVIII.  3. 

"Quocirca  memores  simus 
necesse  est  illius  dicti ;  'Ne  per- 
cuncteris  reverti  ad  Dominum 
neque  differ  as  de  die  in  diem.'  " 

Ibid. 

"  'Et  averterunt  mentem 
suam,  et  declinarunt  oculos 
suos,  ne  in  coelum  suspicerent, 
neque  memores  essent  judicio- 
rum   justorum.'      Adducemus 


326 


THE   CANON    OF   THE   CHURCH 


Quae  flens  suspexit  ad  cae- 
lum: erat  enim  cor  ejus  fidu- 
ciam  habens  in  Domino." 


etiam  in  medium  quae  de  Su- 
sanna scribuntur  hoc  modo 
dicta:  'At  ilia  flens  suspexit  in 
coelum,  quoniam  cor  ejus  fide- 
bat  Domino.'  " 


Sap.  I.  5. 

"Spiritus  enim  sanctus  dis- 
ciplinae  effugiet  fictum,  et  au- 
feret  se  a  cogitationibus,  quae 
sunt  sine  intellectu,  et  corri- 
pietur  a  superveniente  iniqui- 
tate." 


Ibid.  13. 

"Spiritus  sanctus  disciplines 
effugiet  dolosum,  et  recedet  a 
pravis  consiliis." 


Sap.  II.  24. 

(Oft  quoted.) 

Eccli.  XXXI.  17. 

"Ne  comprimaris  in  convi- 


vio. 


Ibid.  Tom.  XXXII.  3. 
(Oft  quoted.) 

Ibid.  14. 

"Scriptum  est  enim  et  hoc 
quoque:  *Ne  comprimaris  cum 
eo  in  catino.'  " 


Dan.  XIII.  42. 

(Already  quoted.) 

Sap.  VII.  25,26. 

(Oft  quoted.) 

EccU.  XV.  17,  18. 

"Apposuit  tibi  aquam  et  ig- 
nem:  ad  quod  volueris,  porrige 
manum  tuam.  Ante  hominem 
vita  et  mors,  bonum  et  ma- 
lum: quod  placuerit  ei,  dabitur 
illi— ." 


Orig.  Comment,  in  Epist.  ad 
Rom.  Lib.  I.  3. 
(Already  quoted). 

Ibid.  5. 

(Oft  quoted.) 

Ibid.  18. 

" — sicut  scriptum  est:  *Ecce 
posui  ante  faciem  tuam  vitam 
et  mortem,  ignem  et  aquam.'  " 


Sap.  XI.  21. 

" — sed  omnia  in  mensura,  et 
numero,  et  pondere,  disposu- 
isti." 


Ibid.  Lib.  II.  3. 

"Sed  sicut  omnia  in  men- 
sura facit  Deus,  et  pondere  et 
numero — ." 


THE   CANON   OF   THE    CHURCH 


327 


Tob.  XII.  7. 

"Etenim  sacramentum  regis 
abscondere  bonum  est:  opera 
autem  Dei  revelare  et  confiteri 
honorificum  est." 

Baruch  IV.  4. 

"Beati  sumus,  Israel:  quia 
quae  Deo  placent,  manifesta 
sunt  nobis." 

Eccli.  XXVIII.  28. 

"Sepi  aures  tuas  spinis,  lin- 
guam  nequam  noli  audire,  et 
ori  tuo  facito  ostia,  et  seras." 


Eccli.  XI.  30. 

"Ante  mortem  ne  laudes 
hominem  quemquam,  quoniam 
in  filiis  suis  agnoscitur  vir." 

Sap.  IX.  15. 

"Corpus  enim,  quod  corrum- 
pitur,  aggravat  animam,  et  ter- 
rena  inhabitatio  deprimit  sen- 
sum  multa  cogitantem." 

Sap.  I.  I. 

"Diligite  justitiam,  qui  judi- 
catis  terram." 


Tob.  IV.  16. 

"Quod  ab  alio  oderis  fieri 
tibi,  vide  ne  tu  aliquando  alteri 
facias." 


Ibid.  4. 

"  'Mysterium'  vero  'regis  ab- 
scondere bonum  est.'  " 


Ibid.  7. 

" — et  ipsi  dicunt:  'Beati  su- 
mus, Israel,  quia  quae  placent 
Deo  nobis  nota  sunt.'  " 

Ibid.  13. 

" — et  dicet  circumcidi  aures, 
cum  secundum  Salomonis  mon- 
ita  non  recipiunt  vanam  audi- 
tionem,  et  cum  oppilantur,  ne 
audiant  judicium  sanguinis,  et 
cum  sepiuntur  spinis  ne  re- 
cipiant  ohtrectationem.'' 

Ibid.  Lib.  III.  2. 

" — sicut  et  Scriptura  dicit: 
'Ne  beatificaveris  hominem 
ante  mortem,  quia  nescis  quae 
erunt  ejus  novissima.'  " 

Ibid. 

" — nunc  vero,  ut  ait  Scrip- 
tura, 'Corruptibile  corpus  ag- 
gravat animam,  et  demergit 
terrena  habitatio  sensum  multa 
cogitantem.'  " 

Ibid.  7. 

" — et  ideo  (Sapientia)  ait: 
' Disci te  justitiam,  qui  judicatis 
terram.'  " 

Ibid. 

"Ilia  enim  lex  potest  sen  tire 
quod  inter  homines  justum  sit, 
ut  quod  in  se  quis  pati  non 
vult,  hoc  ne  proximo  faciat." 


328 


THE    CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH 


Eccli.  XV.  9. 

"Non  est  speciosa  laus  in  ore 
peccatoris — ." 

Sap.  VII.  26. 

(Oft  quoted ) 

II.  Maccab.  VII.  i,  et  seqq. 

"Contigit  autem  et  septem 
fratres  una  cum  matre  sua  ap- 
prehensos  compelli  a  rege  edere 
contra  fas  cames  porcinas,  fia- 
gris,  et  taureis  cruciatos." 


Baruch  III.  36-38. 
(Oft  quoted.) 

Sap.  X.  I. 

**Haec  ilium,  qui  primus  for- 
matus  est  a  Deo  pater  orbis  ter- 
rarum,  cum  solus  esset  creatus, 
custodivit." 


Sap.  IX.  6. 

"Nam  et  si  quis  erit  consum- 
matus  inter  filios  hominum,  si 
ab  illo  abfuerit  sapientia  tua, 
in  nihilum  computabitur. " 

Sap.  IX.  15. 

(Oft  quoted ) 

Dan.  III.  86.  Deut.  Frag. 

"Benedicite,  spiritus  et  ani- 
mae  justorum,  Domino:  lau- 
date  et  superexaltate  eum  in 
saecula." 

Eccli.  I.  16. 

''Initium  sapientiae,  timor 
Domini — ." 


Ibid. 

"Et  iterum  alia  Scriptura 
dicit:  'Non  est  speciosa  laus  Dei 
in  ore  peccatoris.'  " 

Ibid.  Lib.  IV.  8. 

(Oft  quoted.) 

Ibid.  10. 

"Legant  Machabaeorum  lib- 
ros,  ubi  cum  omni  instantia 
mater  cum  septem  filiis  martyr- 
ium  suscipit,  quique  non  solum 
martyrium  patienter  excipiunt, 
verum  et  contumelias  ingerunt 
in  tyrannum — ." 

Ibid. 

(Oft  quoted.) 

Ibid.  Lib.  V.  2. 

" — sicut  de  Sapientia  dici- 
tur:  *Haec,'  in  quit,  'iUum  qui 
primus  factus  est  patrem 
mundi,  cum  solus  esset  creatus, 
custodivit,  et  libera vit  eum  de 
peccato  suo.'  " 

Ibid.  3. 

" — quia  et  si  perfectus  sit 
quis  in  filiis  hominum,  si  non 
adsit  ei  justitia  a  Deo,  in  nihi- 
lum reputabitur." 

Ibid.  Lib.  VI.  3. 

(Oft  quoted.) 

Ibid.  Lib.  VII.  I. 

* '  Et  Daniel  nihilominus  testa- 
tur  et  dicit:  'Benedicite,  spir- 
itus et  animae  justorum,  Dom- 
inum." 

Ibid. 

" — quia  'initium  sapientiae 
timor  Domini.'  " 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH 


329 


Sap.  IX.  15. 

(Oft  quoted.) 

Eccli.  VII.  40. 

"In  omnibus  operibus  tuis 
memorare  novissima  tua,  et  in 
aetemum  non  peccabis." 

Sap.  VII.  25. 

(Oft  quoted.) 

Sap.  I.  7. 

(Oft  quoted.) 

Eccli.  XXVII.  6. 

"Vas  figuli  probat  fomax ;  et 
homines  justos,  tentatio  tribu- 
lationis.^' 

Sap.  VII.  26. 

(Oft  quoted.) 

Sap.  I.  2. 

'^ — quoniam  invenitur  ab  his 
qui  non  tentant  ilium ;  apparet 
autem  eis,  qui  fidem  habent  in 
ilium—." 


Tob.  XII.  7. 

(Oft  quoted.) 


Sap.  IX.  6. 

(Oft  quoted.) 

■     Eccli.  VIII.  6. 

"Ne  despicias  hominem 
avertentem  se  a  peccato,  neque 
improperes  ei;  memento  quon- 
iam omnes  in  correptione  su- 
mus." 


Ibid.  4. 

(Oft  quoted.) 

Ibid.  10. 

"Mementote  novissimorum 
tuorum,  et  in  aeternum  non 
peccabis." 

Ibid.  13. 

(Oft  quoted.) 

Ibid. 

(Oft  quoted.) 

Ibid.  17. 

"Et  Sapientia  dicit:  'vasa 
figuli  probat  fomax;  et  hom- 
ines justoS;  tentatio.'" 

Ibid.  Lib.  VIII.  4. 
(Oft  quoted.) 

Ibid.  5. 

''Sed  audi  quid  etiam  in  Sa- 
pientia Salomonis  dicatur  quia : 
'non  invenietur  ab  his  qui  ten- 
tant eam:  apparebit  vero  his 
qui  non  sunt  increduli  ad 
eum.'  " 

Ibid.  II. 

"  'Mysterium  enim  regis,'  ait 
Scriptura,  'celarebonumest.'  " 

Ibid.  Lib.  IX.  3. 
(Oft  quoted.) 

Ibid.  Lib.  X.  31. 

" — didicerat  enim  a  Scrip- 
tura non  improperare  homini 
convertenti  se  a  peccato.'' 


330  •  THE  CANON  OF  THE  CHURCH 

From  these  numerous  quotations,  taken  from  the  frag- 
ments which  remain  of  Origen's  vast  writings,  we  may  infer 
what  was  his  use  of  the  deuterocanonical  books.  His  au- 
thority is  especially  valuable,  because  he  was  conversant 
with  Hebrew,  and  had  examined  the  canon  of  the  Jews  upon 
their  own  groimds.  He  defends  the  deuterocanonical  books 
against  the  attack  of  Africanus  and  the  Jews ;  he  establishes 
the  authority  of  the  Church  as  criterion  of  the  Canon ;  in  his 
use  of  Scripture  he  makes  no  discrimination  between  the 
books  of  the  first  and  second  canons,  and  imreservedly  as- 
serts that  the  deuterocanonical  works  are  divine  Scripture, 
Hence  we  claim  the  authority  of  Origen  in  support  of  the 
Catholic  Canon  of  Scripture. 

In  the  acts  of  the  disputation  of  St.  Archelaus  with 
Manes,  we  find  a  quotation  from  Wisdom.* 

This  quotation  is  of  much  worth,  since  it  manifests  that 
in  that  early  day  the  canon  of  the  Syrian  Church  comprised 
the  deuterocanonical  works.  The  quotation  is  found*  in  the 
twenty-ninth  chapter  of  the  disputation : 

Sap.  I.  13.  "Archelaus  dixit:       Nequa- 

** —  quoniam  Deus  mortem  quam:  absit!  'Deus  enim  mor- 

non  fecit,  nee  laetatur  in  perdi-  tem  non  fecit,  nee  laetatur  in 

tione  vivorum."  perditione  vivorum.'  " 

We  shall  here  subjoin  some  quotations  found  in  the  ex- 
tant works  of  St.  Methodius,  sumamed  Eubulius,  Bishop  of 
Tyre,  the  bitter  adversary  of  Origen. f 

*St.  Archelaus  was  a  bishop  of  Mesopotamia,  renowned  for  piety  and 
wisdom.  The  date  of  the  disputation  with  Manes  is  the  year  277  A.  D. 
It  is  uncertain  who  has  committed  the  disputation  to  writing. 


fXhe  Roman  martyrology  honors  St.  Methodius  on  the  eighteenth  of 
September.  He  was  of  Olympius,  in  Lycia,  and  afterwards  bishop  of 
Tyre.  He  suffered  martyrdom  in  Chalcis  in  Greece;  according  to  some^ 
under  Diocletian ;  according  to  others,  under  Decius  and  Valerius.  De 
Feller  inclines  to  the  first  opinion,  and  places  the  date  of  such  event 
about  the  year  311.  His  doctrine,  though  at  times  inaccurate,  has  been 
much  praised  by  Jerome,  Epiphanius,  Gregory  of  Nyssa  and  others.  His 
most  celebrated  work  is  the  "Symposium  of  Virgins,"  in  which  he  extols 
the  virtue  of  chastity. 


THE    CANON   OF   THE    CHURCH 


331 


Eccli.  XVIII,  30,  et  XIX.  2. 

"Post  concupiscentias  tuas 
non  eas,  et  a  voluntate  tua 
a  vert  ere.  Vinum  et  mulieres 
apostatare  faciunt  sapientes,  et 
arguent  sensatos — ." 


"Post  concupiscentias  tuas 
ne  eas,  et  ab  appetitibus  tuis 
prohibe  te.  Vinum  enim  et 
mulieres  apostatare  faciunt  sa- 
pientes." 


Sap.  IV.  3.  Ibid. 

"Multigena  autem  impiorum         " —  de  quo  et  alibi:  'Multi- 

multitudonon  eritutilis,etspu-  gena  impiorum  multitudo  non 

ria  vitulamina  non  dabuntradi-  erit  utilis,  et  spuria  vitulamina 

ces  altas — ."  non  dabunt  radices  altas.'  " 


Eccli.  XXIII.  I,  et  5,  6. 

"Domine,  pater  et  domina- 
tor  vitae  meae,  ne  derelinquas 
me  in  consilio  eorum  nee  sinas 
me  cadere  in  illis.  Extollen- 
tiam  oculorum  meorum  ne  de- 
deris  mihi,  et  omne  desiderium 
avert e  a  me.  Aufer  a  me  ven- 
tris  concupiscentias,  et  concu- 
bitus  concupiscentiae,  ne  ap- 
prehendant  me — ." 


Ibid. 

*  'Domine,'  dicens  *  Pater  et 
Deus  vitae  meae,  ne  derelin- 
quas me  in  cogitatu  illorum. 
Extollentiam  oculorum  amovie 
a  me.  Cordis  concupiscentia  et 
concubitus  ne  apprehendant 
me. 


Sap.  IV.  I,  2. 

"O,  quam  pulchra  est  casta 
generatio  cum  claritate!  im- 
mortalis  est  enim  memoria  il- 
lius,  quoniam  et  apud  Deum 
not  a  est,  et  apud  homines. 
Cum  praesens  est,  imitantur 
illam,  et  desiderant  eam,  cum 
se  eduxerit,  et  in  perpetuum 
coronata  triumphat  incoinquin- 
atorum  certaminum  praemium 
vincens." 


Ibid. 

"In  libro  vero  Sapientiae  pa- 
lam  jam,  et  sine  ambagibus 
auditores  ad  continentiam,  et 
castitatem  attrahens  Spiritus 
sanctus  talia  modulatur  .  .  .  da- 
mans: 'Immortalis  enim  est  in 
memoria  illius:  quoniam  et 
apud  Deum  nota  est  et  apud 
homines.  Cum  praesens  est 
honorant  illam  et  desiderant 
eam,  cum  se  abduxerit,  et  in  per- 
petuum coronata  triumphat  in- 
coinquinatorum  certaminum 
agone  superato.'  " 


332 


THE    CANON    OF   THE    CHURCH 


Sap.  III.  i6. 

**Filii  autem  adulterorum  in 
inconsummatione  erunt,  et  ab 
iniquo  thoro  semen  extermina- 
bitur." 


In  the  second  discourse,  that 
of  Theophila: 

"Et  ne  confugias  velut  in 
arcem  securam,  prolato  testi- 
monio  Scripturse  dicentis:  'FiU 
adulterorum  in  inconsumma- 
tione erimt.'  " 


These  two  writers,  though  antagonistic  in  doctrine,  both 
aid  in  building  up  our  thesis,  since  both  recognize  the  ac- 
cepted divine  Scripture  of  the  third  century.  In  the  first 
discourse,  that  of  Marcella,  in  the  symposium,  we  find  the 
following : 


Sap.  IV.  6. 

"Ex  iniquis  enim  somnis  filii, 
qui  nascuntur,  testes  stmt  ne- 
quitiae  adversus  parentes  in  in- 
terrogatione  sua." 

Sap.  XV.  lo,  II. 

"Cinis  est  enim  cor  ejus,  et 
terra  supervacua  spes  illius,  et 
luto  vilior  vita  ejus,  quoniam 
ignoravit,  qui  se  finxit,  et  qui 
inspiravit  illi  animam  quae  op- 
eratur,  et  qui  insufiiavit  ei 
spiritum  vitalem." 


Baruch  III.  14. 

"Disce,  ubi  sit  prudentia,  ubi 
sit  virtus,  ubi  sit  intellectus,  ut 
scias  simul,  ubi  sit  longitumi- 
tas  vitae  et  victus,  ubi  sit  lu- 
men oculorum  et  pax." 


Sap.  VII.  9. 

" —  nee  comparavi  illi  lapi- 
dem  pretiosum,  quoniam  omne 


Ibid. 

"  *Ex  iniquis  enim,'  inquit, 
'somnis,  filii  qui  nascuntur,  tes- 
tes sunt  nequitiae  adversus  pa- 
rentes  in  interrogatione  per- 
suasibiliumsermonum.*  " 

Ibid. 

" —  in  libro  Sapientiae  ait: 
'Cinis  est  cor  eorum,  et  terra 
supervacua  spesillorum,et  luto 
vilior  vita  eorum,  quoniam 
ignorarunt  qui  se  finxit,  et  qui 
inspiravit  illis  animam  quae 
operatur,  et  qui  insufiiavit  eis 
spiritum  vitalem.'  " 

In  the  eighth  discourse,  that 
of  Thecla: 

"Discite  ubi  sit  prudentia, 
ubi  sit  virtus,  ubi  sit  intellectus 
ut  scias  simul  ubi  sit  long- 
itumitas  vitae  et  victus,  ubi 
sit  lumen  oculorum  et  pax. 
Quis  invenit  locum  ejus?  et  quis 
intra vit  in  thesauros  eorum?" 

In  the  eleventh  discourse » 
that  of  Arete: 

"Neque  si  quis  pecuniarum 
cupiditate    capitur,    virginita- 


THE   CANON    OF   THE   CHURCH 


333 


aunim  in  comparatione  illius 
arena  est  exigua,  et  tamquam 
lutum  aestimabitur  argentum 
in  conspectu  illius." 


tern  vere  studet  colere:  spemit 
enim  illam,  verius  lucrum  exi- 
guum  ipsi  praeferens;  cui  ta- 
men  nulla  est  comparabilis  re- 
rum  in  vita  pretiosarum." 


Judith  XIII.  Passim. 


Ibid. 

"Peregrinum  ductorem  nu- 
merosissimorum  exercituum 
fortiter  aggrediens,  ardua  feli- 
citer  exequens  destinata,  Ju- 
dith dolose  decollavit  pulchri- 
tudinis  suae  delinitum  specie 
priusquam  ullam  membris  cor- 
poris obtulisset  maculam — ." 


Dan.  XIII.  19,  20. 

"Cum  autem  egressae  essent 
puellae,  surrexerunt  duo  senes, 
et  accurrerunt  ad  eam,  et  dixe- 
runt:  Ecce  ostia  pomarii  clausa 
sunt,  et  nemo  nos  videt,  et  nos 
in  concupiscentia  tui  sumus; 
quam  ob  rem  assentire  nobis,  et 
commiscere  nobiscum." 


Ibid. 

"Videntes  speciem  decoram 
nudi  Susannae  corporis,  duo  ju- 
dices  amore  furentes  dixerunt: 
*0  mulier,  hie  adsumus  te  clam 
potiri  cupientes.'  " 


Sap.  I.  14. 

"Creavit  enim,  ut  essent  om- 
nia, et  sanabiles  fecit  nationes 
orbisterrarum:  etnon  est  in  illis 
medicamentum  exterminii,  nee 
infer orum  regnum  in  terra." 


St.  Method.  De  Resurrec- 
tione  (Fragmentary). 

" — sapientiaadstruithis  ver- 
bis: 'Creavit  enim  Deus  ut  es- 
sent omnia,  et  salutares  sunt 
mundi  genera tiones,  et  non  est 
in  illis  medicamentum  exter- 
minii.' " 


Sap.  II.  23. 

"Quoniam  Deus  creavit 
hominem  inexterminabilem,  et 
ad  imaginem  similitudinis  suae 
fecit  ilium." 


Ibid. 

"At qui  homo  est  immortalis: 
'Creavit  enim,'  inquit  Sapien- 
tia,  'hominem  inexterminabi- 
lem, et  imaginem  aetemitatis 
suae  fecit  ilium.'  " 


334 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH 


Sap.  VII.  21.  Ibid,  in  fine. 

" — et  quaecumque    sunt  "Quamobrem     etiam     Salo- 

absconsa  et  improvisa,  didici:  mon 'artificem  omnium' apella- 

omnium  enim  artif  ex  docuit  me  vit — . ' ' 
sapientia." 

Eccli.  XV.  1 8.  Ibid,  ex  f ragmen tis. 

•'Ante  hominem  vita  et  mors,  "Posui  enim,'  inquit,   'ante 

bonum  et  malum;  quod  placu-  faciem     tuam  vitam  et  mor- 

erit  ei,  dabitur  illi — ."  t^^- 


Eccli.  I.  2. 

"Arenam  maris,  et  pluviae 
guttas,  et  dies  saeculi  quis  di- 
numeravit?" 


Sap.  XV.  3. 

"Nosse  enim  te,  consummata 
justitia  est;  et  scire  justitiam 
et  virtutem  tuam,  radix  est  im- 
mortalitatis." 


St.  Method.  DeCreatis.  (frag- 
mentary) . 

" —  quomodo  Sapientia  in 
Jesu  Sirach  dicit:  'Arenam 
maris,  et  pluviae  guttas,  et  dies 
saeculi  quis  dinumerabit?'  " 

S.  Method.  De  Simeone  et 
Anna. 

"Porro:  'Nosse  te  consum- 
mata justitia  est,  et  scire  poten- 
tiam  tuam  radix  immortalita- 
tis." 


Baruch  III.  24. 

"O  Israel,  quam  magna  est 
domus  Dei,  et  ingens  locus  pos- 
sessionis  ejus!" 


Eccli.- XVI.  7. 

"In  synagoga  peccantium 
exardebit  ignis,  et  in  gente  in- 
credibili  exardescet  ira." 


Ibid. 

" —  ut  quodam  loco  inclytus 
Prophet  a  ait:  'Quam  magna 
domus  Dei,  et  ingens  locus  pos- 
sessionis  ejus!  Magnus,  et  non 
habet  finem.'  " 

Ibid. 

"Item  alio  loco:  'In  gente 
incredibili  exardescit  ignis.'  " 


S.  Methodius,  in  Ramos  Pal- 

Dan.  XIII.  56.  marum. 

"Et,  amoto  eo,  jussit  venire  "O  Chanaan  impudentis  se- 
alium,  et  dixit  ei:  Semen  Cha-  men,  non  pii  ac  timentis  Deum, 
naan    et    non    Juda,     species     Juda!" 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  CHURCH  335 

decepit    te,  et    concupiscentia 
subvertit  cor  tuum — ." 

Method,    quoted   by    Olym- 
piodorus  in  Catena  Nice- 
Sap.  XII.  I.  tae. 

"O  quam  bonus  et  sua  vis  est,  ''Methodius  autem,  Spiritum 
Domine,  spiritus  tuus  in  omni-  divinum  qui  a  Deo  omnibus 
bus!"  concessus  est,  et  de  quo  Salo- 

mon dixit:  'Incorruptus  tuus 
Spiritus  in  omnibus,'  pro  con- 
scientia  accipit,  quae  et  ani- 
mam  peccatricem  condemnet." 

There  are  several  quotations  from  deuterocanonical 
Scripture  in  the  works  of  St.  Gregory  of  Neocaesarea,  which 
we  omit  here,  since  they  are  found  in  w^orks  which  Migne 
judged  dubious. 

There  are  a  few  certain  citations  from  the  deuterocanoni- 
cal books  in  the  fragments  which  have  been  collected  of  the 
works  of  Dionysius  the  Great.* 

*The  precise  date  of  the  birth  of  Dionysius  the  Great  is  uncertain. 
He  was  in  Egypt  when  Cyprian  was  in  North  Africa,  and  he  came  under 
the  influence  of  Origen.  He  succeeded  Heraclas  in  the  Episcopal  See  of 
Alexandria  in  247  A.  D.,  which  see  he  held  for  seven  teen  years,  till  his  death 
in  265.  He  was  forced  to  flee  in  the  Decian  persecution,  and,  at  one  time, 
his  life  was  only  saved  by  a  miracle.  Under  Valerian,  he  made  a  public 
profession  of  faith,  and  was  exiled  to  Cephro  in  Libya.  Having  stren- 
uously opposed  the  Sabellian  Heresy,  he  was  denounced  to  Dionysius, 
the  Roman  Pontiff,  that  his  tenets  were  not  sound  concerning  the  con- 
substantiality  of  the  Son  and  the  Father.  As  Sabellius  had  denied  that 
there  was  any  distinction  between  the  Father  and  the  Son,  Dionysius, 
in  opposition,  may  have  exceeded  bounds  somewhat  in  extending  the 
distinction  between  these  two  persons,  but  his  error  was  not  formal. 
Dionysius  cleared  himself  of  imputation  of  heresy,  publishing  four  books 
in  his  own  defense.  There  came  a  lull  in  the  persecution  under  Gallien us, 
and  in  261  Dionysius  returned  to  his  see.  He  was  called  to  Antioch  to 
give  judgment  in  the  trial  of  the  heretic  Paul  of  Samosata,but  feebleness 
prevented  a  personal  appearance  there.  He  signified  his  opinions  in 
writings,  fragments  of  which  remain.  Dionysius  wrote  many  things,  but 
only  small  fragments  of  these  remain.  The  most  important  of  his  works 
are  his  Apology  and  his  Letters. 

The  few  quotations  which  we  shall  adduce  will  place  Dionysius  in  the 
rank  of  those  who  considered  the  deuterocanonical  books  as  divine 
Scripture.  • 


336 


THE   CANON   OF  THE   CHURCH 


Eccli.  XVI.  26,  27. 

"In  judicio  Dei  opera  ejus  ab 
initio,  et  ab  institutione  ipso- 
rum  distinxit  partes  illorum,  et 
initia  eorum  in  gentibus  suis. 
Omavit  in  setemum  opera  illo- 
rum, nee  esurierunt,  nee  labo- 
raverunt,  et  non  destiterunt  ab 
operibus  suis." 

Eccli.  XVI.  30,31. 

"Post  haec  Deus  in  terram 
respexit,  et  implevit  illam  bo- 
nis suis.  Anima  omnis  vitalis 
denuntiavit  ante  faciem  ipsius, 
et  in  ipsam  iterum  reversio 
illorum." 


Dionysius,  De  Natura  III.  B. 

"Audite  vero  divinorum  or- 
aculorum  vocem:  *In  judicio 
Domini  opera  ejus.  Ab  initio  et 
a  creatione  ipsorum  distinxit 
partes  illorum.  Ornavit  in 
getemum  opera  sua,  etprincipia 
eorum  in  generationes  eorum. '  ' ' 

Ibid.  V.  A. 

" — et  illud:  'post  haec  enim 
Dominus  in  terram  respexit,  et 
implevit  illam  bonis  suis.  An- 
ima omnis  animantis  operuit 
faciem  ejus.'  " 


Tob.  XII.  7. 

"Etenim  sacramentum  regis 
abscondere  bonum  est:  opera 
autem  Dei  revelare  et  confiteri, 
honorificum  est." 


Idem.  Epist.  X.  (Adversus 
Germanum)  IV. 

"Sed  quoniam  arcanum  qui- 
dem  regis  occultare,  utaitScrip- 
tura,  laudandum  est;  Dei  au- 
tem opera  praedicare,  glorio- 
sum;  adversus  Germani  im- 
petum  cominus  decertabo." 

The  Constitutiones  Apostolicae  also  manifest  that  the 
Church,  in  the  third  century,  recognized  the  deuterocanon- 
ical  books  as  divine  Scripture.* 

*The  age  and  author  of  the  Apostolical  Constitutions  are  uncertain. 
They  are  inserted  by  Migne  among  the  Opera  dubia  of  St.  Clement  of 
Rome ;  but  no  one  now  attributes  to  him  their  authorship.  De  Magistris 
contends  that  their  author  was  St.  Hippolyte,  although  he  admits  later 
interpolations.  It  is  quite  generally  admitted  now  that  the  work  is  a 
product  of  the  third  century  which  has  suffered  later  interpolations.  The 
work  consisted  of  eight  books,  oktcl^l^Xov^  containing  practical  precepts 
of  Christian  life,  and  principles  of  church  polity.  Though  of  uncertain 
authorship,  and  often  erroneous  in  its  present  state  in  dogma,  it  is  val- 
uable to  illustrate  the  traditions  of  the  Church  in  that  early  age.  Opin- 
ions differ  as  to  the  date  of  its  origin,  but  all  agree  that  it  goes  back  to 
the  third  century.  The  name  does  not  indicate  that  its  author  wished  to 
deceive  by  making  it  appear  that  his  book  was  written  by  the  Apostles. 
The  Constitutions  were  called  Apostolic,  because  they  were  founded  on 
the  applied  teachings  of  the  Apostles, 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH 


337 


Eccli.  XXVIII.  i6. 

"Lingua  tertia  multos  com- 
movit,  et  dispersit  illos  de  gente 
in  gentem — ." 

Dan.  XIII. 


Dan.  XIII.  48,  49- 

"Qui  cum  staret  in  medio 
eorum  ait:  Sic  fatui  filii  Israel, 
non  judicantes,  neque  quod  ve- 
rum  est  cognoscentes,  condem- 
nastis  filiam  Israel?  Reverti- 
mini  ad  judicium,  quia  falsum 
testimonium  locuti  sunt  ad- 
versus  eam." 


Judith  XII.  8. 

"Et  ut  ascendebat,  orabat 
Dominum  Deum  Israel,  ut 
dirigeret  viam  ejus  ad  libera- 
tionem  populi  sui." 

Eccli.  XXVI.  28. 

"Duae  species  difficiles  et  per- 
iculosae  mihi  apparuerunt:  dif- 
ficile exuitur  negotians  a  neg- 
ligentia:  et  non  justificabitur 
caupo    a    peccatis    labiorum." 

Eccli.  XXX.  12. 

"Curva  cervicem  ejus  in  ju- 
ventute,  et  tunde  latera  ejus, 
dum  infans  est,  ne  forte  indu- 
ret,  et  non  credat  tibi:  et  erit 
tibi  dolor  animae." 


Const.  Apost.  Lib.  II.  21. 

"Multi  quippe  sunt  malevoli 
dicaces,  tertiam  linguam  haben- 
tes." 

Ibid.  XXXVII. 

" — ut  olim  Baby  lone  duo 
senes  adversum  Susannam — ." 
(The  same  allusion  is  repeated 
in  the  XLIX.  Chapter.) 

Ibid.  L.  I. 

"Quoniam  Susannam  qui- 
dem  Dominus  per  Daniel  em 
eripuit  e  manibus  iniquorum*, 
reos  autem  sanguinis  feminae 
senes  ad  ignem  damnavit:  vobis 
vero  per  Danielem  exprobravit 
dicens:  *Sic  fatui  filii  Israel, 
non  dijudicantes,  neque  quod 
manifestum  est  cognoscentes, 
condemnastis  fiHam  Israel  ? 
Revertimini  ergo  ad  judicium, 
quia  falsum  testimonium  isti 
locuti  sunt  adversus  eam.'  " 

Lib.  III.  6. 

"Quemadmodum  ergo  sapi- 
entissima  Juditha,  pudicitiae 
testimonio  Celebris,  nocte  ac  die 
Deum  pro  Israel  deprecabatur" 

Lib.  IV.  6. 

" — quia  non  justificabitur 
caupo  de  peccato — ." 


Lib.  IV.  II. 

"Etadhuc:  Tunde  latera  ejus, 
dum  infans  est,  ne  forte  indura- 
tus  non  credat  tibi." 


(00\   W    Q 


338 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH 


Esther  IV.  i6. 

"Vade  et  congrega  omnes 
Judaeos,  quos  in  Susan  repere- 
ris,  et  orate  pro  me.  Non  come- 
datis,  et  non  bibatis  tribus  die- 
bus  et  tribus  noctibus,  et  ego 
cum  ancillis  meis  similiter  je- 
junabo:  et  tunc  ingrediar  ad  re- 
gem  contra  legem  faciens,  non 
vocata,  tradensque  me  morti 
etpericulo." 

Judith,  VIII.  6. 

" —  et  habens  super  lumbos 
suos  cilicium,  jejunabat  omni- 
bus diebus  vitae  suae,  praeter 
sabbata,  et  neomenias,  et  festa 
domus  Israel." 

Eccli.  XXIV.  35. 

" — qui  implet  quasi  Phison 
sapientiam,  et  sicut  Tigris  in 
diebus  no vorum — . ' ' 


EccH.  XXV.  36. 
"A  camibus  tuis  abscinde  il- 
1am,  ne  semper  te  abutatur." 

EccH.  V.  8. 

"Non  tardes  converti  ad  Do- 
minum,  et  ne  differas  de  die  in 
diem—." 

Baruch  IV.  4. 

"Beati  sumus,  Israel:  quia 
quae  Deo  placent,  manifesta 
sunt  nobis. " 

Sap.  III.  I. 

**Justorum  autem  animae  in 
manu  Dei  sunt,  et  non  tanget 
illos  tormentum  mortis." 


Lib.  V.  20. 

"Item  Esthera  et  Mardoch- 
aeus,  et  Juditha  insult ationem 
impiorum  Holophemis  et  Am- 
anis  jejunando  declinarunt." 


Lib.  VI.  5. 

" — detrac toque  eis  Spiritu 
sancto  ac  imbre  prophetico,  im- 
plevit  ecclesiam  suam  gratia 
spirituali,  velut  fluvium  ^gypti 
in  diebus  novorum." 

Ibid.  14. 

"Abscinde  enim  eam,"  in- 
quit,  "a  camibus  tuis." 

Ibid.  15. 

"Ne  differas  enim  converti 
adDominum." 

Ibid.  23. 

"Beati  sumus,  Israel,  quia 
quae  placita  sunt  Deo  manifesta 
sunt  nobis." 

Ibid.  30. 

"Justorum  animae  in  manu 
Dei." 


THE    CANON    OF   THE    CHURCH 


339 


Sap.  11.  23,  24. 

"Quoniam  Deus  creavit  hom- 
inem  inexterminabilem,  et  ad 
imaginem  similitudinis  suae  fe- 
cit ilium.  Invidia  autem  dia- 
boli  mors  introivit  in  orbem 
terrarum : — . ' ' 

Tob.  IV.  16. 

"Quod  ab  alio  oderis  fieri  tibi 
vide,  ne  tu  aliquando  alteri  fa- 
cias." 

Esther  XIV.  12. 

"Memento,  Domine,  et  os- 
tende  te  nobis  in  tempore  tri- 
bulationis  nostrae,  et  da  mihi 
fiduciam,  Domine,  rex  deorum 
et  universae  potestatis — ." 

I.  Mac.  II. 


Judith  VIII. 


Dan.  XIII.  42. 

"Exclamavit  autem  IJ  voce 
magna  Susanna,  et  dixit:  Deus 
aeteme,  qui  absconditorum  es 
cognitor,  qui  nosti  omnia,  ante- 
quam  fiant — ." 

Judith  VIII. 


Lib.  VII.  I 

** — naturale  quidem  est  vitae 
iter,  adscitum  autem  iter  mor- 
tis ;  non  illius  quae  ex  voluntate 
Dei  exstitit,  verum  illius  quae 
ex  insidiis  diaboli." 

Ibid.  2. 

"Omne  quod  non  vis  tibi 
fieri,  et  tu  hoc  alteri  ne  facias." 

Ibid.  33. 

".^teme  Salvator  noster,  rex 
deorum. ' ' 


Ibid.  37. 

"Tu,  Domine  Deus,  nunc 
quoque  suscipe  preces  labiis 
prolatis  populi  tui  congregati 
ex  gentibus  .  .  .  sicut  suscepisti 
munera  justorum  in  eorum 
saeculis  .  .  .  Mathathiae  et  filio- 
rum  ejus  in  zelo  tuo — ." 

Lib.  VIII.  2. 

"Sed  et  mulieres  prophetave- 
runt  .  .  .  Holda  et  Juditha." 

Ibid.  5. 

"Qui  es  vere,  Dominus  Deus 
omnipotens, . .  .  qui  omnia  nosti 
antequam  fiant — ." 


Ibid.  25. 

"Vidua  non  ordinatur;  sed  si 
multo  ante  amisit  virum,  et 
caste  et  inculpabiliter  vixit,  ac 
domesticorum  optime  curam 
gessit  ut  Juditha — ." 


340  THE  CANON  OF  THE  CHURCH 

Sap.  III.  I.  Ibid.  41. 

(Already  quoted.)  ** — quia    cunctorum    animae 

apud  te  vivent,  et  spiritus  just- 
orum  in  manu  tua  sunt,  quos 
non  tanget  cruciatus." 

Eccli.  XXXI.  35.  Ibid.  44. 

"Vinum  in  jucunditatem  ere-  "Hoc  autem  dicimus  non  ut 
atum  est,  et  non  in  ebrietatem,  vinum  nequaquam  bibant:  eo 
ab  initio."  enim  modo  contumelia  afficer- 

ent  id  quod  a  Deo  factum  est  ad 
IcBtitiam.'' 

For  the  tradition  of  the  African  Church,  we  turn  to  the 
two  great  lights  of  that  Church  Tertullian  and  Cyprian.* 

♦Quintus  Septimius  Florens  TertuUianus  was  the  son  of  a  centurion  in 
the  Roman  armies  stationed  in  Proconsular  Africa.  It  appears  evident 
that  he  had  first  given  himself  to  a  forensic  career.  The  faith  and  con- 
stancy of  the  Martyrs  impressed  him  deeply,  and  in  the  fourth  year  of  the 
reign  of  Septimius  Severus  he  embraced  the  faith  of  Jesus  Christ.  At 
Carthage  he  was  ordained  priest,  and  passed  thence  to  Rome,  where  he 
published  his  Apology  for  the  Christians,  a  masterpiece  of  erudition  and 
eloquence.  Tertullian  was  endowed  by  nature  with  a  capacious  mind, 
endowed  with  a  peculiar  ardor  and  natural  severity.  For  some  years  he 
used  his  splendid  powers  for  the  best  interests  of  the  Christian  Church. 
He  was  naturally  inclined  to  that  which  was  rigorous.  He  seemed  to 
find  a  lack  of  severity  in  the  Gospels  of  the  Christian  dispensation.  This 
natural  impetuosity  made  him  a  prey  to  the  fanatic  Montanus.  A  very 
probable  opinion  sustains  that  baffled  ambition  and  the  opposition  of  the 
clergy  of  Rome  conspired  to  cause  his  defection.  Montanus  pretended 
that  God,  having  failed  to  save  the  world  by  Moses,  the  Prophets,  and  even 
by  the  Incarnation,  had  sent  the  Holy  Spirit  into  him  to  execute  the  salva- 
tion of  the  elect.  He  associated  with  himself  Priscilla  and  Maximilla,  two 
women  of  high  rank  but  of  immoral  lives.  They  affected  great  austerity, 
and  rigid  fasts  They  forbade  second  marriages,  denied  the  absolving 
power  of  the  Church  for  certain  sins,  and  considered  flight  from  persecu- 
tion as  apostasy.  They  laid  claim  to  prophecy,  inveighed  against  the 
hierarchy  of  the  Chiu-ch,  proclaimed  that  they  were  to  raise  the  Christians 
from  their  spiritual  infancy  in  which  they  had  hitherto  lived.  The  appar- 
ent severity  of  their  morals  drew  many  to  the  sect,  but  being  founded  on  a 
violent  misconception,  it  failed.  Montanus  is  "said  by  Eusebius  to  have 
hanged  himself.  The  last  years  of  Tertullian's  life  were  spent  in  this 
wretched  heresy,  and  he  wrote  many  of  his  works  while  a  Montanist. 
There  is  no  good  evidence  that  he  ever  abandoned  the  error.  Tertullian's 
works  may  be  divided  into  two  classes ;  those  written  before  his  lapse  into 
Montanism,  and  those  written  after.  The  first  class  includes  Apologia  pro 
Christianis,  Libri  duo  ad  Nationes,  De  Testimonio  Animae,  ad  Martyres,  De 


THE    CANON    OF   THE   CHURCH 


341 


Dan.  XIII.  32. 

"At  iniqui  illi  jusserunt  ut 
discooperiretur  (erat  enim  coo- 
perta)  ut  vel  sic  satiarentur  de- 
core  ejus." 

II.  Mac.  VII.  28. 

"Peto,  nate,  ut  aspicias  ad 
caelum  et  terram,  et  ad  omnia 
quae  in  eis  sunt:  et  intelligas, 
quia  ex  nihilo  fecit  ilia  Deus,  et 
hominum  genus — ." 

An  evident  allusion  to  the 
Benedictus  of  Dan.  III. 
24-90. 

Judith  passim. 


Eccli.  XI.  14. 

"Bona  et  mala,  vita  et  mors, 
paupertas  et  honestas  a  Deo 
sunt." 


Dan.  III.  24-90. 


Tertull.  De  Corona  IV.  A. 

"Si  et  Susanna  in  judicio  re- 
vela  ta  argumentum  velandi 
praestat — ." 

Adversus  Hermogenem  XXI. 

"Ita  si  ex  nihilo  Deus  cuncta 
fecisse  non  potuit,  Scriptura 
non  adjecisset  ilium  ex  nihilo 
fecisse — ." 

Ibid.  XLIV. 

" — cui  etiam  inanimalia  et 
incorporalia  laudes  canunt 
apud  Danielem." 

Adversus  Marcionem,  Lib.  I. 
VII. 

"Si  communio  nominum  con- 
ditionibus  praejudicat,  quanti 
nequam  servi  regum  nominibus 
insultant,  Alexandri,  et  Darii 
et  Holophernts?" 

Ibid.  XVI. 

"Cur  in  hac  sola  specie  uni- 
formen  eum  capiunt,  visibilium 
solummodo  et  vitam  et  mortem 
et  mala  et  pacem.'' 

Adversus  Marcionem,  Lib.V. 
II. 

"Quod  non  alius  quam  Cre- 
ator intelligetur  qui  et  universa 
benedixit,   habes   Genesim;  et 


Spectaculis,  De  Idololatria,  Ad  Scaptilam,  De  Oratione,  De  Baptismo,  De 
Poenitentia,  De  Patientia,  Ad  Uxorem,  libri  duo,  De  Cultu  Feminum,  lib 
II.  In  the  second  class  are  De  Corona  Militis,  De  Fuga  in  Perseciitione, 
Adversus  Gnosticos,  Adversus  Praxeam,  Adversus  Hermogenen,  Adversus 
Marcionem,  lib.  V.,  Adversus  Valentinianos,  Adversus  Judaeos,  De  Anima, 
De  Came  Christi,  De  Resurrectione  Carnis,  De  Velandis  Virginibus,  De  Ex- 
hortatione  Castitatis,  De  Monogamia,  De  Jejuniis,  De  Pudicitia,  De 
Pallio. 

It  is  uncertain  whether  the  work  De  Praescriptionibus  was  written 
before  or  after  his  defection. 


342 


THE   CANON   OF  THE   CHURCH 


Sap.  I.  I. 

Diligite  justitiam,  qui  judi- 
catis  terram.  Sentite  de  Dom- 
ino in  bonitate,  et  in  simplici- 
tate  cordis  quaerite  ilium. 

Eccli.  XLIV.  17. 

"Noe  inventus  est  perfectus, 
Justus,  et  in  tempore  iracun- 
diae  f actus  est  reconciliatio." 

I.  Mac.  passim. 


Sap.  I.  6. 

"Benignus  est  enim  spiritus 
sapientiae,  et  non  liberabit  male- 
dicum  a  labiis  suis:  quoniam 
renum  illius  testis  est  Deus,  et 
cordis  illius  scrutator  est  verus, 
et  linguae  ejus  auditor." 

Eccli.  XV.  18. 

"Ante  hominem  vita  et  mors, 
bonum  et  malum:  quod  placu- 
erit  ei,  dabitur  illi — ." 

Baruch  VI.  3-5. 

"Nunc  autem  videbitis  in 
Babylonia  deos  aureos,  et  arg- 
enteos,  et  lapideos,  et  ligneos  in 
humeris  portari,  ostentantes 
metum  Gentibus.  Videte  ergo 
ne  et  vos  similes  efficiamini 
factis  alienis,  et  metuatis,  et 
metus  vos  capiat  in  ipsis.  Visa 
itaque   turba   de  retro,   et   ab 


ab  universis  benedicitur,  habes 
Danielem." 

Ad  versus   Valentinianos   II. 

"Porro  facies  Dei  spectat  in 
simplicitate  quaerentes,  ut  do- 
cet  ipsa  Sophia,  non  quidem 
Valentini  sed  Salomonis." 

Adversus  Judaeos  II. 

"Nam  unde  Noe  Justus  in- 
ventus— ?" 

Ibid.  IV. 

"Nam  et  temporibus  Mac- 
cabaeorum,  Sabbatis  pugnando, 
fortiter  fecerunt,  et  hostes  allo- 
phylos  expugnaverunt,  legem- 
que  patemam  ad  pristinum 
vitae  statum,  pugnando  Sab- 
batis, revocaverunt." 

De  Anima  XV. 

"Si  enim  scrutatorem  et  dis- 
pectorem  cordis  Deum  legi- 
mus — ." 


De  Monogamia  XIV. 

"Ecce,  inquit,  posui  ante  te 
bonum  et  malum:  elige  quod 
bonum  est." 

Adversus  Gnosticos  VIII. 

"Meminerant  enim  et  Jere- 
miae  scribentis  ad  eos  quibus 
ilia  cap ti vitas  imminebat:  'Et 
nunc  videbitis  deos  Babyloni- 
orum  aureos  et  argenteos  et 
ligneos  portari  super  humeros, 
ostentantes  nationibus  timo- 
rem.  Cavete  igitur  ne  et  vos 
consimiles   sitis    allophylis,    et 


THE    CANON   OF  THE    CHURCH 


343 


ante,  adorantes,  dicite  in  cordi- 
bus  vestris:  Te  oportet  ador- 
ari,  Domine." 


Dan.  XIV.  3-24. 

"Rex  quoque  colebat  eum,  et 
ibat  per  singulos  dies  adorare 
eum:  porro  Daniel  adorabat 
Deum  suum.  Dixitque  ei  rex: 
Quare  non  adoras  Bel?  Dixit- 
que Daniel:  Dominum  Deum 
meum  adoro:  quia  ipse  est  Deus- 
vivens:  iste  autem  non  est  Deus 
vivens." 

Sap.  I.  I. 

(Already  quoted.) 


Eccli.  XI.  30. 

''Ante  mortem  ne  laudes 
hominem  quemquam,  quoniam 
in  filiis  suis  agnoscitur  vir." 


timore  capiamini,  dum  aspicitis 
turbas  adorantes  retro  eos  et 
ante:  sed  dicite  in  animo  ves- 
tro:  te,  Domine,  adorare  de- 
bemus.'  " 

De  Idololatria  XVIII. 

" — statimque  apparuisset 
Danielem  idolis  non  deservisse, 
nee  Bel  nee  draconemi  colere 
quod  multo  postea  apparuit.'' 


De  Praescriptionibus  VII. 

"Nostra  institutio  de  porticu 
Salomonis  est,  qui  et  ipse  tra- 
diderat,  Dominum  in  simplici- 
tate  cordis  esse  quaerendum." 

*Cyprian.  Epist.  V.  2. 

" — cum  scriptum  sit:  'Ante 
mortem  ne  laudes  hominem 
quemquam.'  " 


♦Closely  allied  with  Tertullian,  is  St.  Cyprian.  He  declares  himself  that 
TertuUian  had  been  his  master.  The  style  of  Tertullian  is  rough,  and 
tinged  with  certain  African  barbarisms.  In  the  words  of  Balzac:  "Ter- 
tullian's  is  an  iron  style,  but  it  must  be  allowed  that  with  this  metal  he  has 
forged  excellent  weapons."  Cyprian  tempers  the  roughness  of  his  master, 
but  still  he  retains  much  of  the  genius  of  his  country.  He  has  been  called 
by  Lactantius  the  first  eloquent  father  of  the  Latin  Church.  Cyprian  was 
descended  from  an  illustrious,  rich  family  in  Proconsular  Africa  in  the  first 
half  of  the  third  century.  As  a  pagan,  he  first  devoted  himself  to  eloquence. 
He  was  converted  through  the  labors  of  the  priest  Caecilius  in  246,  A.  D. 
He  sold  what  he  had,  and  gave  to  the  poor,  embraced  continency,  took  the 
habit  of  a  philosopher,  and  substituted  the  reading  of  the  Sacred  Scriptures 
for  that  of  the  profane  authors.  His  great  talents  placed  him  in  the 
Episcopal  see  of  Carthage  in  248  His  labors  in  the  see  of  Carthage  were 
immense.  He  was  the  father  of  the  poor,  the  light  of  the  clergy  and  the 
consoler  of  the  people.  The  Decian  persecution  forced  him  to  flee  from 
his  see  for  some  years,  but  he  again  returned  to  his  post.  The  character 
of  Cyprian  was  firm  and  uncompromising.  When  he  was  accused  before 
Pope  Cornelius  by  Privatus,  he  sent  no  defense  to  Rome.  To  the  Pope, 
who  asked  an  explanation  of  this,  he  responded,  that  it  was  established 


344 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH 


Dan  XIII. 


Sap.  III.  II. 

"Sapientiam  enim  et  discip- 
linam  qui  abjicit,  infelix  est: 
et  vacua  est  spes  illorum,  et 
labores  sine  fructu,  et  inutilia 
opera  eorum." 

Ecc.  VII.  29-31. 

" — honora  patrem  tuum,  et 
gemitus  matris  tuae  ne  oblivis- 
caris — .  In  tota  anima  tua  time 
Dominum,  et  sacerdotes  illius 
sanctifica. ' ' 

Eccli.  XXVIII.  28. 

"Sepi  aures  tuas  spinis,  lin- 
guam  nequam  noli  audire,  et 
ori  tuo  facito  ostia  et  seras." 

Eccli.  XXXIV.  30. 

"Qui  baptizatur  a  mortuo,  et 
iterum  tangit  eum;  quid  pro- 
ficit  lavatio  illius?" 


Idem.  Epist.  XL.  4. 

"Nee  aetas  vos  eorum,  nee 
auctoritas  fallat,  qui  ad  duo- 
rum  presbyterorum  veterem 
nequitiam  respondentes,  sicut 
illi  Susannam  pudicam  corrum- 
pere  et  violare  conati  sunt,  sic 
ethi,"  etc. 

Idem.  Epist.  LXII.  i. 

" — et  iterum  scrip tum  sit: 
'Disciplinam  qui  abjicit  infelix 
est.'  " 


Idem.  Epist.  LXVI. 

"Et  iterum  (Salomon):  'Ho- 
nora Deum  ex  tota  anima  tua, 
et  honorifica  sacerdotes  ejus.'  " 


Idem.  LXIX.  7. 

" — nee  recordaris  scriptum 
esse:  *Sepi  aures  tuas  spinis,  et 
noli  audire  linguam  nequam.'  " 

Idem.  Epist.  LXXI.  i. 

" —  non  considerantes  scrip- 
tum esse:  'Qui  baptizatur  a 
mortuo,  quid  proficit  lavatio 
ejus?'  " 


among  the  Bishops  that  a  crime  should  be  examined  where  it  was  com- 
mitted. This  natural  firmness  led  Cyprian  to  oppose  Pope  Stephen  in  the 
celebrated  question  of  the  baptism  by  heretics.  The  only  justification 
that  can  be  offered  for  Cyprian  is,  that  the  Pope's  province  in  the  Chiu-ch 
was  not  so  well  understood  then  as  now.  Hatred  of  heresy  led  him  into 
an  error  that  was  by  no  means  formal.  He  suffered  martyrdom  for  the 
faith  in  258.  Whatever  was  blameworthy  in  his  contention  with  Pope 
Stephen  was  washed  out  in  the  blood  of  martyrdom.  He  was  a  prolific 
writer.  His  chief  works  are:  Eighty-three  Epistles,  De  Habitu  Virginis, 
De  Lapsis,  De  Unitate  Ecclesiae,  Ad  Demetrianum,  De  Idolorum  Vanitate 
De  Mortalitate,  De  Opere  et  Eleemosynis,  De  Bono  Patientiae,  De  Zelo  et 
Livore,  Ad  Fortunatum,  Ad  Quirinum. 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH 


345 


Sap.  III.  4-8. 

"Etsi  coram  hominibus  tor- 
menta  passi  sunt,  spes  illorum 
immortalitate  plena  est.  In 
paucis  vexati  in  multis  bene 
disponentur,  quoniam  Deus 
tentavit  eos,  et  invenit  illos  dig- 
nos  se.  Tamquam  aurum  in 
fomace  probavit  illos,  et  quasi 
holocausti  hostiam  accepit 
illos,  et  in  tempore  erit  respec- 
tus  illorum." 

Sap.  III.  II. 

(Already  quoted.) 

Sap.  V.  8,  9, 

''Quid  nobis  profuit  super- 
bia?  aut  divitiarum  jactantia 
quid  contulit  nobis?  Transie- 
runt  omnia  ilia  tamquam  um- 
bra, et  tamquam  nuntius  per- 
currens — ." 

Dan.  XIV.  30  et  seqq. 

"Qui  miserunt  eum  in  lacum 
leonum;  et  erat  ibi  diebus  sex." 


Tob.  XII.  7. 

"Etenim  sacramentum  regis 
abscondere  bonum  est:  opera 
autem  Dei  revelare  et  confiteri, 
honorificum  est." 


Sap.  V.  1-9. 

'Tunc  stabunt  justi  in  mag- 
na constantia  adversus  eos. 
qui  se  angustiaverunt,  et  qui  ab- 
stulerunt  labores  eorum,"  etc. 


Idem.  Epist.  LXXXI.  2. 

Et  iterum  ubi  loquitur  Scrip- 
tura  divina  de  tormentis  quae 
Martyres  Dei  consecrant,  et  in 
ipsa  possessionis  probatione 
sanctificant:  *Et  si  coram  hom- 
inibus tormenta  passi  sunt,  spes 
eorum  immortalitate  plena  est. 
Et  in  paucis  vexati  in  multis 
bene  disponentur — .'  " 


De  Habitu  Virginum  I. 

"Et  denuo  legimus:  'Discip- 
linam  qui  abjicit,  infelix  est.'  " 

Ibid.  X. 

" —  cum  dicat  Scriptura  di- 
vina: 'Quid  nobis  profuit  su- 
perbia?  aut  quid  divitiarum 
jactatio  contulit  nobis?  Transi- 
erunt  omnia  ilia  tamquam  um- 
bra.' " 

De  Oratione  Dominica  XXI. 

"Sic  Danieli  in  leonum  lacu 
jussu  regis  incluso  prandium 
divinitus  procuratur,  et  inter 
feras  esurientes  et  parcentes 
homo  Dei  pascitur." 

Ibid.  XXXIII.  • 

"Sic  et  Raphael  angelus  To- 
biae  oranti  semper,  et  semper 
operanti  testis  fuit  dicens: 
'Opera  Dei  revelare  et  confiteri, 
honorificum  est — .'  " 

De       Idolorum       Vanitate, 
XXIV. 

"Et  iterum  (dicit  Sancta 
Scriptura) :  'Tunc  stabunt  justi 
in  magna  constantia  adversus 
eos  qui  se  angustiaverunt,'  "etc. 


346 


THE   CANON   OF    THE   CHURCH 


EccH.  II.  1-4,  5. 

"Fili,  accedens  ad  servitu- 
tem  Dei,  sta  in  justitia  et  tim- 
ore,  et  praepara  animam  tuam 
ad  tentationem.  Omne  quod 
tibi  applicitum  fuerit,  accipe, 
et  in  dolore  sustine,  et  in  humil- 
itate  tua  patientiam  habe :  quo- 
niam  in  igne  probatur  aurum 
et  argentum,  homines  vero  re- 
ceptibiles,  in  camino  humilia- 
tionis." 

Tob.  II.  16. 

"Ubi  est  spes  tua,  pro  qua 
eleemosynas,  et  sepulturas  faci- 
ebas?" 


Tob.  XII.  11-15. 

(Already  quoted.) 


Eccli.  Ill,  33. 

"Ignem  ardentem  extinguit 
aqua,  et  eleemosyna  resistit 
peccatis — ." 


De  Mortalitate,  IX. 

"Docet  et  praemonet  Scrip- 
tura  divina  dicens:  Tili,  acced- 
ens ad  servitutem  Dei,  sta  in 
justitia  et  timore,  et  praspara 
animam  tuam  ad  tentationem. 

Et  iterum:  'In  dolore  sustine, 
et  in  humilitate  tua  patientiam 
habe,  quoniam  in  igne  proba- 
tur aurum  et  argentum,  hom- 
ines vero  receptibiles,  in  cam- 
ino humiliationis.'  " 

Ibid.  X. 

"Et  Tobias  post  opera  mag- 
nifica  .  .  .  quem  et  ipsum  uxor 
depravare  tentavit  dicens:  'Ubi 
sunt  justitise  tuse?  Ecce  quae 
pateris.'  " 

Ibid. 

"Quem  postmodum  Raphael 
Angelus  collaudat,  et  dicit: 
'Opera  Dei  revelare  et  confiteri 
honorificum  est — .'  " 

De  Opere  et  Eleemosynis  II. 

"Item  denuo  dicit:  'Si cut 
aqua  extinguit  ignem,  sic  elee- 
mosyna extinguit  peccatum.'  " 


Tob.  XII.  8. 

"Bona  est  oratio  cum  jeju- 
nio,  et  eleemosyna  magis  quam 
thesauros  auri  recondere — ." 


Tob.  XIV.  10,  II. 

"Audite  ergo,  filii  mei,  pa- 
trem  vestrum:  Servite  Domino 
in  veritate,  et  inquirite  ut  faci- 
atis  quae  placita  sunt  illi:  et 
filiis  vestris  mandate  ut  faciant 


Ibid.  V. 

"Raphael  quoque  Angelus. .  . 
hortatur  dicens:  'Bona  est  ora- 
tio cum  jejunio  et  eleemosyna, 
quia  eleemosyna  a  morte  libe- 
rat  et  ipsa  purgat  peccata," 

Ibid.  XX. 

"Et  nunc,  fili,  man  do  tibi: 
'servi  Deo  in  veritate  et  fac 
coram  illo  quod  illi  placet:  et 
filiis  manda  ut  faciant  justitiam 
et  eleemosynas,  et  sint  mem- 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH 


347 


justitias  et  eleemosynas,  ut  sint 
memores  Dei,  et  benedicant 
eum  in  omni  tempore  in  veri- 
tate,  et  in  tota  virtute  sua." 

Tob.  IV.  2-16. 

" — dixitque  ei:  Audi,  fili  mi, 
verba  oris  mei,  et  ea  in  corde 
tuo,  quasi  fundamentum  con- 
strue. .  .  .  Omnibus  autem  die- 
bus  vitae  tuse  in  mente  habeto 
Deum:  et  cave  ne  aliquando 
peccato  consentias,  et  praeter- 
mittas  praecepta  Domini  Dei 
nostri,  etc." 

Eccli.  II.  4. 

"Omne,  quod  tibi  applicitum 
fuerit,  accipe:  et  in  dolore  sus- 
tine,  et  in  humilitate  tua  pa- 
tientiam  habe — ." 

Tob.  Passim. 


Sap.  XV.  15-17. 

" — quoniam  omnia  idola  na- 
tionum  deos  aestimaverunt," 
etc. 

Sap.  XIII.  1-4. 

"Vani  autem  sunt  omnes 
homines,  in  quibus  non  subest 
scientia  Dei:  et  de  his,  quae 
videntur  bona,  non  potuerunt 
intelligere  eum,  qui  est,  neque 
operibus  attendentes  agnover- 
unt  quis  esset  artifex:  sed  aut 


ores  Dei,  et  benedicant  nomen 
ejus  omni  tempore.'  " 


Ibid. 

"Et  iterum:  'Omnibus  diebus 
vitae  tuae,  fili  dilectissime,  in 
mente  habeto  Deum:  et  cave 
jie  aUquando  peccato  consen- 
tias, et  praecepta  Domini  Dei 
nostri,'  "  etc. 


De  Dono  Patientiae  XVII. 

" — sicut  scrip tum  est:  *In 
dolore  sustine,  et  in  humilitate 
tua  patientiam  habe,  quoniam 
in  igne  probatur  aurum  et  ar- 
gentum.'  " 

Ibid.  XVIII. 

"Tobias  quoque  post  justitiae 
et  misericordiae  suae  opera  mag- 
nifica,  luminum  amissione  ten- 
tatus,  in  quantum  patienter 
caecitatem  pertulit,  intantum 
granditer  Deum  patientiae 
laude  promeruit." 

De  Exhortatione  Martyrii  I. 

"In  Sapientia  Salomonis: 
*  Omnia  idola  nationum  aestima- 
verunt deos — ." 

Ibid. 

"Item  apud  Salomonem  de 
elementis:  'Neque  opera  attend- 
entes agnoverunt,  quis  esset 
artifex:  sed  aut  ignem,  aut 
spiritum,  aut  citatum  aerem, 
ant  gyrum  stellarum,  aut  nim- 
iam  aquam,  aut  solem  et  lu- 


348 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH 


ignem,  aut  spiritum,  aut  cita- 
tum serem,  aut  gyrum  stella- 
rum,"faut  nimiam  aquam,  aut 
solem  et  lunam,  rectores  orbis 
terrarum  deos  putaverunt. 
Quorum  si  specie  delectati, 
deos  putaverunt:  sciant  quanto 
his  dominator  eorum  speciosior 
est ;  speciei  enim  generator  haec 
omnia  constituit.  Aut  si  virtu- 
tem,  et  opera  eorum  mirati 
sunt,  intelligant  ab  illis,  quo- 
niam  qui  haec  fecit,  fortior  est 
ilHs— ," 

EccH.  II.  5. 

** — quoniam  in  igne  probatur 
aurum  et  argentum,  homines 
vero  receptibiles,  in  camino  hu- 
miHationis." 

Dan.  XIV.  4. 

"Qui  respondens,  ait  ei:  Quia 
non  colo  idola  manufacta,  sed 
viventem  Deum,  qui  creavit 
caelum,  et  terram,  et  habet  po- 
testatem  omnis  camis." 


nam,  rectores  orbis  terrarum 
deos  putaverunt.  Quorum  si 
specie  delectati  deos  putaver- 
unt, sciant,  quanto  his  domi- 
nator eorum  speciosior  est:  spe- 
ciei enim  generator  haec  omnia 
constituit.  Aut,  si  virtutem  et 
opera  eorum  mirati  sunt,  in- 
telHgant  ab  ilHs,  quoniam  qui 
haec  fecit,  fortior  est  iUis.'  " 


Ad  Fortunatum  IX. 

"Et  iterum  apud  Salom- 
onem:  'Vasa  figuH  probat 
fomax  homines  justos,  tenta- 
tio  tribulationis.'  " 

Ibid.  XI. 

"Et  Daniel,  Deo  devotus  et 
Sancto  Spiritu  plenus,  excla- 
mat  et  dicit:  'Nihil  colo  ego  nisi 
Dominum  Deum  meum,  qui 
condidit  coelum  et  terram.'  " 


Tob.  XIII.  6. 

"Aspicite  ergo  quae  fecit  no- 
biscum,  et  cum  timore  et  tre- 
more  confitemini  illi:  regemque 
saeculorum  exaltate  in  operibus 
vestris." 


Ibid. 

"Tobias  quoque  .  .  .  praedicat 
dicens:  'Ego  in  terra  captivit- 
atis  meae  confiteor  illi,  et  osten- 
do  virtutem  ejus  in  natione  pec- 
ca trice.'  " 


II.  Mac.  VII.  9. 

" — et  in  ultimo  spiritu  con- 
stitutus,  sic  ait:  Tu  quidem  sce- 
lestissime,  in  praesenti  vita  nos 
perdis:  sed  Rex  mundi  defunc- 
tos  nos  pro  suis  legibus  in 
aetemae  vitae  resurrectione  sus- 
citabit." 


Ibid. 

"At  ille  (Martyr  Maccabai- 
cus)  in  martyrio  suo  fidens,  et 
resurrectionis  sibi  praemium  de 
Dei  remuneratione  promittens, 
exclamavit  et  dixit:  'Tu  qui- 
dem impotens,  ex  hac  presenti 
vita  nos  perdis,  sed  mundi  rex 


THE   CANON    OF   THE   CHURCH 


349 


II.  Mac.  VII.  1-41. 


il.  Mac.  VI.  30. 

"Sed,  cum  plagis  perimere- 
tur,  ingemuit,  et  dixit:  Dom- 
ine,  qui  habes  sanctam  scien- 
tiam,  manifeste  tu  scis,  quia, 
cum  a  morte  possem  liberari, 
duros  corporis  sustineo  dolores: 
secundum  animam  vero  prop- 
ter timorem  tuum  libenter  haec 
patior." 

Sap.  III.  4-8. 

"Etsi  coram  hominibus,"  etc. 


Sap.  V.  1-9. 

"Tunc  stabunt  justi  in  mag- 
na constantia  adversus  eos,  qui 
se  angustiaverunt,"  etc. 


Tob.  XII.  15. 

"Ego  enim  sum  Raphael  An- 
gelus,  unus  ex  septem,  qui  ad- 
stamus  ante  Dominum." 

Eccli.  XXIV.  5-20. 
"Ego  ex  ore    Altissimi  pro- 
divi  primogenita  ante    omnem 


defunctos  nos  pro  suis  legibus 
in  aetemam  vitae  resurrectione 
suscitabit."  ' 

Prosequitur  et  refert  mortem 
septem  Fratrum  et  matris  eor- 
um. 

Ibid. 

"Atille  (Eleazar)  ingemiscens 
ait:  'Domine,  qui  sanctam 
habes  scientiam,  manifestum 
est  quia  cum  possem  a  morte 
Hberari,  durissimos  dolores 
corporis  tolero,  flagellis  vapu- 
lans;  animo  autem  propter  tui 
ipsius  metum  libenter  haec  pa- 
tior.' " 

Ibid.  XII. 

"Per  Salomonem  Spiritus 
Sanctus  ostendit,  et  praecinit 
dicens:  *Et  si  coram  homini- 
bus,.' "  etc 

Ibid. 

"Item  apud  eundem  vindicta 
nostra  describitur  .  .  .  :  Tunc 
stabunt  justi  in  magna  constan- 
tia adversus  eos  qui  se  angus- 
tiaverunt,' "  etc. 

Ad  Quirinum  (Vocantur  quo- 
que  hi  tres  libri,  Testi- 
monia    adversus   Judaeos) 

Lib.  I.  XX. 
" — ut  angeli  septem  qui  as- 
sistunt    et    conversantur   ante 
faciem  Dei,  sicut  Raphael  an- 
gelus  in  Tobia  dicit." 

Ibid.  Lib.  II.  I. 
''Item  apud  eundum  Salom- 
onem in  Ecclesiastico:  'Ego  ex 


350 


THE   CANON   OF   THE    CHURCH 


creaturam:  ego  feci   in  coelis,' 
etc. 


Sap.  II.  12-17. 
"Circumveniamus   ergo    jus- 
tum,"  etc. 

Tob.  II.  2. 

" — dixit  filio  suo:  Vade,  et 
adduc  aliquos  de  tribu  nostra, 
timentes  Deum,  ut  epulentur 
nobiscum." 


ore  Altissimi  prodivi,  primo- 
genita  ante  omnem  creaturam. 
Ego  in  coelis  feci,'  "  etc. 

Ibid.  Lib.  11.  XIV. 
"In     Sapientia     Salomonis: 
'Circumveniamus  justum,"  etc. 

Ibid.  Lib.  III.  I. 

**De  hoc  ipso  apud  Tobiam: 
*Et  dixit  Tobias  filio  suo:  Vade 
et  adduc  quemcumque  pau- 
perem  inveneris  ex  fratribus 
nostris,  qui  tamen  in  mente  ha- 
beat  Deum  ex  toto  corde  suo. 
Hunc  adduc,  et  manducabit 
pariter  meum  prandium  hoc. 
Ecce  sustineo  te,  fili,  donee  ve- 
nias.'  " 


Tob.  IV.  5-1 1. 

"Cum  autem  et  ipsa  comple- 
verit  tempus  vitae  suae,  sepelias 
eam  circa  me.  Omnibus  autem 
diebus  vitae  tuae,  in  mente  ha- 
beto,"  etc. 

II.  Mac.  XL  12. 

** — et  cum  nee  ipse  jam  foe- 
torem  suum  ferre  posset,  it  a 
ait:  Justum  est,  subditum  esse 
Deo,  et  mortalem  non  paria 
Deo  sen  tire." 

I.  Mac.  II.  62,  63. 

"Et  a  verbis  viri  peccatoris 
ne  timueritis,  quia  gloria  ejus 
stercus  et  vermis  est.  Hodie  ex- 
tollitur,  et  eras  non  invenietur: 
quia  conversus  est  in  terram 
suam,  et  cogitatio  ejus  periit." 


Ibid. 

"Item  illic:  'Omnibus  diebus 
vitae  tuae,  fili,  Deum  in  mente 
habe,'  "  etc. 


Ibid.  IV. 

"De  hoc  ipso  in  Maccabaeis: 
'Justum  est  subditum  Deo  esse, 
et  mortalem  non  paria  Deo  sen- 
tire.'  " 


Ibid. 

"Item  illic:  'Et  verba  viri 
peccatoris  ne  timueritis,  quia 
gloria  ejus,  in  stercora  erit,  et  in 
vermes.  Hodie  extollitur,  et 
eras  non  invenietur:  quoniam 
conversus  est  in  terram  suam, 
et  cogitatio  ejus  periit.'  " 


THE   CANON   OF   THE    CHURCH 


351 


Eccli.  XXVII.  6. 

"Vasa  figuli  probat  fomax; 
et  homines  justos,  tentatio  trib- 
ulationis." 

Tob.   11.    22. 

"Ad  haec  uxor  ejus  irata  re- 
spondit:  Manifeste  vana  facta 
est  spes  tua,  et  eleemosynae 
tuae  modo  apparuerunt." 

Eccli.  XXIII.  II. 

"Sicut  enim  servus  interrog- 
atus  assidue,  a  livore  non 
minnitur,  sic  omnis  jurans,  et 
nominans,  in  toto  a  peccato  non 
purgabitur." 

Sap.  III.  4. 

(Oft  quoted.) 


I.  Mac.  II.  52. 

"Abraham,  nonne  in  tenta- 
tione  inventus  est  fidelis,  et 
reputatum  est  ei  ad  justitiam  ?' ' 


Sap.  V.  1-9. 

(Oft  quoted.) 


II.  Mac.  VII.  9-19. 
(Oft  quoted.) 


Eccli.  I.  16. 

Initium  sapientise,  timor 
Domini;  et  cum  fidelibus  in 
vulva  concreatus  est,  cum  elec- 
tis  feminis  graditur,  et  cum 
justis  et  fidelibus  agnoscitur." 


Ibid.  VI. 

"Apud  Salomonem:  *Vasa 
figuli  probat  fomax;  et  hom- 
ines justos,  tentatio  tribula- 
tionis.'  " 

Ibid. 

"De  hoc  ipso  in  Tobia:  'Ubi 
sunt  justitiae  tuae?  Ecce  quae 
pateris.'  " 

Ibid.  XII. 

"Apud  Salomonem:  *Vir 
multum  jurans  replebitur  in- 
iquitate,  et  non  discedet  a 
domo  ejus  plaga;  et  si  vane  ju- 
ra verit,  non  justificabitur.'  " 

Ibid.  XV. 

"De  hoc  ipso  in  Sapientia  Sa- 
lomonis:  'Et  si  coram  homini- 
bus,'  "  etc.  (Oft  quoted.) 

Ibid. 

"De  hoc  ipso  in  Maccabaeis: 
'Abraham,  nonne  in  tentatione 
inventus  est  fidelis,  et  deputa- 
tum  est  ei  ad  justitiam?'  " 

Ibid.  XVI. 

"Item  (Salomon)  illic:  'Time 
stabunt  justi  in  magna,'  "  etc. 
(Oft    quoted.) 

Ibid.  XX. 

"De  hoc  ipso  in  Maccabaeis: 

Domine,    qui    sanctam   habes 

scientiam,'  "  etc.    (Oft  quoted.) 

Ibid.  XX. 

'^Dehoc  ipso  in  Sapientia  Sa- 
lomonis :  'Initium  Sapientiae 
metuere  Deum.'  " 


352 


THE  CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH 


Dan.  XIII.  1-3. 


Eccli.  X.  29. 

"Noli  extollere  te  in  faciendo 
opere  tuo,  et  noli  cunctari  in 
tempore  angustiae." 

Sap.  I.  I. 

"Diligite  justitiam,  qui  judi- 
catis  terram.  Sentite  de  Dom- 
ino in  bonitate,  et  in  simplici- 
tate  cordis  quaerite  ilium — ." 

I.  Mac.  II.  60. 

"Daniel  in  sua  simplicitate 
liberatus  est  de  ore  leonum." 


Ibid. 

"Item  in  Danieli:  Tuit  vir 
habitans  in  Babylonia  cui  no- 
men  erat  Joachim,  et  accepit 
uxorem  nomine  Susannam,  fil- 
iam  Helciae,  formosam  valde  ac 
timentem  Deum,  et  erant  pa- 
rentes  ejus  justi  et  docuerunt 
filiam  suam  secundum  legem 
Moysi.'  " 

Ibid  XLI. 

"Apud  Salomonem  in  Eccle- 
siastico:  'Noli  te  extollere  in 
faciendo  opere  tuo.'  " 

Ibid.  LIII. 

"Item  apud  Salomonem  in 
Sapiential  'Et  in  simplicitate 
cordis  quaerite  ilium.'  " 

Ibid. 

"Item  in  Maccabaeis:  'Daniel 
in  sua  simplicitate  liberatus  est 
de  ore  leonum.'  " 


Sap.  IV.  11-14. 

" — raptus  est  ne  malitia  mu- 
taret  intellectum  ejus,  aut  ne 
fictio  deciperet  animam  illius. 
Placita  enim  erat  Deo,  anima 
illius,"  etc. 

Sap.  XV.  15-17. 

' '  Omnia  idola  nationum, ' '  etc. 


Sap.  XIII.  1-4. 

(Already  quoted.) 


Ibid.  LVIII. 

"Item  in  Sapientia  Salo- 
monis:  'Raptus  est  ne  malitia 
mutaret  intellectum  ejus.  Pla- 
cita enim  erat  Deo  anima  illi- 
us.' " 

Ibid.  LIX. 

"In  Sapientia  Salomonis: 
'Omnia  idola  nationum,'  "  etc. 
(Oft  quoted.) 

Ibid. 

"De  hoc  ipso:  'Neque  opera 
attendentes cognoverunt,'  "etc. 
(Already  quoted.) 


THE   CANON    OF    THE    CHURCH 


353 


Tob.  IV.  12  (juxta  Graecum.) 

''Uxorem  accipe   ex  semine 

parentum  tuonim,  et  noli  sum- 

ere  alienam  mulierem  quae  non 

est  ex  tribu  parentum  tuorum." 

Sap.  III.  II. 

"Disciplinam  qui  abjicit,  infe- 
lix  est." 

Eccli.  IX.  2  2. 

"Viri  justi  sint  tibi  convivae, 
et  in  timore  Dei  sit  tibi  gloria- 
tio." 

Eccli.  VI.  i6. 

* 'Amicus  fi  delis,  medicamen- 
tum  vitae  et  immortalitatis :  et 
qui  metuunt  Dominum,  inveni- 
ent  ilium." 

Eccli.  IX.  1 8. 

"Longe  abesto  ab  homine 
potestatem  habente  occidendi, 
et  non  suspicaberis  timorem." 

Eccli.  XXV.  12. 

"Beatus,  qui  invenit  amicum 
verum,  et  qui  enarrat  justi tiam 
auri  audienti." 


Eccli.  XXVIII.  28. 
"Sepi   aures  tuas  spinis,   et 
noli  audire  linguam  nequam." 


Eccli.  IV.  34. 

"Noli  citatus  esse  in  lingua 
tua:  et  inutilis,  et  remissus  in 
operibus  tuis." 


Ibid.  LXII. 

"Apud  Tobiam:  'Uxorem  ac- 
cipe ex  semine  parentum  tuo- 
rum, et  noli  sumere  alienam 
mulierem  quae  non  est  ex  tribu 
parentum  tuorum.'  " 

Ibid.  LXVI. 

"Item  in  Sapientia  Salo- 
monis :  '  Disciplinam  qui  abjicit, 
infelix  est.'  " 

Ibid.  XCV. 

"Item  apud  eundem  in  Ec- 
clesiastico:  'Viri  justi  sint  tibi 
convivae.'  " 

Ibid. 

"Et  iterum:  'Amicus  fidelis, 
medicamentum  vitae  et  immor- 
talitatis.' " 

Ibid. 

"Item  illic:  'Longe  abesto  ab 
homine  potestatem  habente  oc- 
cidendi, et  non  suspicaberis 
timorem.'  " 

Ibid. 

"Item  illic:  'Beatus  qui  in- 
venit amicum  verum,  et  qui 
enarrat  justitiam  auri  au- 
dienti—.' " 

Ibid. 

"Item  illic:  'Sepi  aures  tuas 
spinis,  et  noli  audire  linguam 
nequam.'  " 

Ibid.  XCVI. 

"Apud  Salomonem  in  Eccle- 
siastico:  'Noli  citatus  esse  in 
lingua  tua,  et  inutilis  et  remis- 
sus in  operibus  tuis.'  " 


(23)  H.  S. 


354 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH 


Eccli.  V.  8,  9. 

"Non  tardes  convert!  ad  Do- 
minum,  et  ne  differas  de  die  in 
diem;  subito  enim  veniet  ira 
illius,  et  in  tempore  vindictae 
disperdet  te." 

Eccli.  VII.  39. 

*'Non  te  pigeat  visitare  in- 
firmum:  ex  his  enim  in  dilec- 
tione  firmaberis." 

Eccli.  XXVIII.  15. 

"Susurro  et  bilinguis  male- 
dictus:  multos  enim  turbabit 
pacem  habentes." 

Eccli.  XXXIV.  23. 
*'Dona  iniquorum  non  pro- 
bat  Altissimus,"  etc. 


Sap.  VI.  6,  7. 

"Horrende  et  cito  apparebit 
vobis:  quoniam  judicium  duris- 
simum  his,  qui  praesunt,  fiet. 
Exiguo  enim  conceditu.r  miseri- 
cordia;  potentes  autem  poten- 
ter  tormenta  patientur." 

Eccli.  IV.  10,  II. 

"Esto  pupillis  misericors  ut 
pater;  et  pro  viro  matri  illo- 
rum,  et  eris  velut  filius  Altis- 
simi,  si  obedieris." 

Eccli.  II.  I. 

"Fili,  accedens  ad  servitutem 
Dei,  sta  in  justitia,  et  timore, 
et  praepara  animam  tuam  ad 
tentationem." 


Ibid.  XCVII. 

"Apud  Salomonem  in  Eccle- 
siastico:  'Ne  tardes  converti  ad 
Deum,  et  ne  differas  de  die  in 
diem.  Subito  enim  venit  ira 
illius.'  " 

Ibid.  CIX. 

' '  Apud  Salomonem  in  Ecclesi- 
astico:  'Ne  pigriteris  visitare  in- 
firmum.  Ex  his  enim  in  dilec- 
tione  firmaberis.'  " 

Ibid.  ex. 

"In  Ecclesiastico  apud  Salo- 
monem: 'Susurro  et  bilinguis 
maledictus.  Multos  enim  tur- 
babit pacem  habentes.'  " 

Ibid.  CXI. 

"Apud  eumdem:  'Dona  ini- 
quorum non  probat  Altissi- 
mus.' " 

Ibid.  CXII. 

"Apud  Salomonem:  'Judi- 
cium durissimum  in  his  qui 
praesunt  fiet.  Exiguo  enim  con- 
ceditur  misericordia ;  potentes 
autem  potenter  tormenta  pa- 
tientur.' " 

Ibid.  CXIII. 

"Apud  Salomonem:  'Esto 
pupillis  misericors  ut  pater;  et 
pro  viro  matri  illorum;  et 
eris  velut  filius  Altissimi  si 
obedieris.'  " 

De  Laude  Martyrii  XIV. 

"Fili,  in  quit  Dominus,  ac- 
cedens ad  servitutem  Dei,  sta 
in  justitia  et  timore,  et  praepara 
animam  tuam  ad  tentationem. ' ' 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  CHURCH  355 

Eccli.  II.  4.  Ibid.  XVI. 

''Omne,  quod  tibi  applicitum  ''Scriptum  est  et  legimus :  'In 
fuerit,  accipe:  et  in  dolore  sus-  dolore  sustine,  et  in  humilitate 
tine,  et  in  humilitate  tua  patien-  tua  habe  patientiam,  quoniam 
tiam  habe — ."  per  ignem  probatur   aurum  et 

argentum.'  " 

Sap.  III.  4.  Ibid. 

(Oft  quoted.)  "_sicut  per  Prophetam  su- 

um  dixit:     'Et  si  coram  hom- 
inibus,'  "  etc.      (Oft  quoted.) 

These  numerotis  quotations  evince  that  the  Church,  for 
the  first  three  centuries,  received  as  Divine  Scripture  all  the 
books  which  later,  in  the  Council  of  Trent,  she  solemnly 
canonized.  These  quotations  were  a  product  of  the  life  of 
the  Church.  The  Fathers  incorporated  into  their  works 
these  numerous  quotations,  not  by  means  of  Concordances 
of  Holy  Writ,  or  other  easy  method  of  reference,  but  because 
their  Christian  education  had  been  mainly  derived  from  the 
Holy  Books.  They  spoke  from  the  fund  that  they  had  as- 
similated from  the  spiritual  food  of  the  Church;  and,  hence, 
in  these  quotations,  they  are  exponents  not  of  their  ow^n 
opinions,  but  of  the  unanimous  belief  of  a  Church  daily 
baptized  in  the  blood  of  her  martyrs. 

Against  this  harmonious  array  of  evidence  from  tradi- 
tion, our  adversaries  bring  certain  objections,  based  upon 
the  same  source  of  information.  Their  Achilles  to  break 
the  chain  of  tradition  is  Meliton,  Bishop  of  Sard  is.* 
The  celebrated  passage,  a  fragment  from  his  *EK\oy(ov,  is  as 
follows:  "Meliton  sends  greeting  to  his  brother  Onesimus. 
As  you  have  frequently  desired,  in  your  zeal  for  the  Scrip- 
tures, that  I  should  make  selections  for  you  both  from  the 
Law  and  the  Prophets,  respecting  our  Saviour  and  our  whole 
faith;  and  you  were  moreover  desirous  of  having  an  exact 
statement  of  the  Old  Testament ;  how  many  in  number,  and 

*St.  Meliton  was  bishop  of  Sardis  in  Lydia  in  the  second  half  of  the 
second  century,  under  Marcus  Aurelius  He  presented  to  this  prince  in 
171  an  Apology  for  the  Christians,  remarkable  for  candor  and  truth.  Of 
his  numerous  writings  but  small  fragments  have  come  down  to  us. 


856  THE  CANON  OF  THE  CHURCH 

in  what  order  the  books  were  written,  I  have  endeavored 
to  perform  this ;  for  I  know  your  zeal  in  the  faith,  and  your 
great  desire  to  acquire  knowledge,  and  that  especially  by 
the  love  of  God  you  prefer  these  matters  to  all  others,  thus 
striving  to  gain  eternal  life.  When,  therefore,  I  went  to  the 
East,  and  came  as  far  as  the  place  where  these  things  were 
proclaimed  and  done,  I  accurately  ascertained  the  books 
of  the  Old  Testament,  and  send  them  to  thee  here  below. 
The  names  are  as  follows:  Genesis,  Exodus,  Leviticus, 
Numbers  and  Deuteronomy;  Jesus  Nave,  (Joshua),  Judges, 
Ruth,  four  books  of  Kings,  twd  of  Paralipomena,  Psalms  of 
David,  Proverbs  of  Solomon,  which  is  also  called  Wisdom, 
Ecclesiastes,  Canticle  of  Canticles,  Job,  the  Prophets  Isaias, 
Jeremias,  and  of  the  twelve  prophets  one  book,  Daniel, 
Ezechiel,  and  Esdras.  From  these  I  have  made  six  books 
of  Selections." 

This  list  omits  Esther  and  all  the  deuterocanonical  books. 
The  omission  of  Esther  has  been  variously  explained.  Some 
have  attributed  it  to  a  lapse  of  memory ;  others  to  an  error  of 
the  copyist.  It  is  far  more  probable  that  such  omission  is. 
due  to  the  uncertainty  and  discussions  that  then  existed 
among  the  Rabbis  concerning  this  book.  Meliton  depends 
on  the  Jews  entirely  for  his  canon.  He  finds  it  necessary  to 
go  to  their  country  to  ascertain  the  true  canon  of  the  Old 
Testament.  His  exclusion,  however,  of  the  deuterocanoni- 
cal books  is  not  equivalent  to  their  condemnation.  In  his 
Clavis  in  S.  Scripturam,  he  employs  Wisdom  and  a  deutero- 
canonical fragment  of  Esther. 

Sap.  VIII.  I.  Ibid. 

"Attingit  ergo  a  fine  usque  ''— et  in  Salomone:  'Sapien- 

ad  finem  fortiter,'  "  etc.  tia  Domini  attingit  a  fine  usque 

ad  finem  fortiter.'  " 

Esther  X.  12.  Ibid. 

" — et  recordatus  est  Dom-  " — et  alibi:    Recordatus  est 

inus  populi  sui,"  etc.  Dominus  populi  sui.'  " 

There  seems  to  have  been  in  vogue  at  that  time  a  distinc- 
tion of  the  Sacred  Writings  of  the  Old  Testament,  founded 
more  on  their  origin  than  on  any  internal  difference.     The 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  CHURCH  357 

books  which  the  Church  had  received  from  the  Jews,  and 
w^hich  were  recognized  by  all,  were  termed  ofioXoyovfievot. 
The  others  were  those  that  the  Church  had  received  from 
the  Septuagint,  and  which  the  Jews  rejected ;  these  were  the 
'afjL(f)L^aX\6/jL€voL.  Now  there  is  no  voice  in  tradition,  with 
the  sole  exception  of  St.  Jerome,  that  ever  rejected  these 
books.  As  witnesses  of  tradition,  they  make  no  discrimina- 
tion between  these  two  classes ;  but  as  critics,  in  which  capac- 
ity they  are  of  least  worth,  they  sometimes  omit  these  from 
the  official  list  of  the  Holy  Scriptures.  It  may  be  that  some 
one  among  them  doubted  of  the  divinity  of  the  writings. 
We  are  not  seeking  of  them  what  they  individually  held,  but 
what  the  Church  of  their  day  taught  and  believed. 

In  the  growth  and  development  of  doctrine  this  has  al- 
ways been  verified,  that  certain  truths  were  less  clearly  con- 
spicuous in  the  deposit  of  faith  in  the  beginning,  which  after- 
wards grew  to  their  full  life  in  the  body  of  the  Church's 
doctrines.  Meliton  may  have  doubted;  he  does  not  deny. 
Other  truths,  which  have  been  defined  on  the  warrant  of 
tradition, .  have  encountered  stronger  opposition.  St. 
Thomas  strenuously  denied  the  Immaculate  Conception,  and 
yet  that  truth  triumphed,  and  finally  entered  among  the 
defined  dogmas.  In  tradition,  we  must  lose  sight  of  the  in- 
dividual, and  of  his  private  opinions,  and  seek  only  the 
faith  of  the  Church  reflected  in  his  writings.  Again,  Meli- 
ton's  position  may  be  explained  as  only  an  indication  of  the 
greater  extrinsic  authority  of  the  protocanonical  books. 
The  question  in  his  day  had  not  been  defined  by  the  Church. 
The  protocanonical  books  could  claim  a  sort  of  official  pro- 
mulgation, inasmuch  as  they  were  transmitted  by  the  old 
custodians  of  Yahveh's  law.  The  deuterocanonical  books 
had  only  the  usage  of  the  Christian  people  in  their  favor. 
Now,  in  such  case,  a  man,  even  though  revering  the  second 
class  as  God's  word,  could  rightly  restrict  the  word  canoni- 
cal to  the  first  class.  All  Catholics  receive  and  honor  all  of 
Mary's  prerogatives,  but  no  one  can  place  among  the  dogmas 
of  faith  her  Assumption,  and  it  is  only  in  our  own  times  that 
we  may  incorporate  among  the  dogmas  the  Immaculate 
Conception.     But  even  were  we  to  concede  the  worst,  that 


358  THE  CANON  OF  THE  CHURCH 

Meliton  rejected  the  deuterocanonical  books,  our  thesis  is 
not  weakened.  His  would  be  the  critical  error  of  one  man, 
availing  naught  against  the  voice  of  the  Church  of  truth 
reverberating  through  the  practical  usage  of  the  "pars 
docens"  and  ''pars  discens"  of  the  Church. 

The  value  of  this  proof  from  tradition  is  not  impaired  by 
the  Fathers'  occasional  references  to  the  Apocryphal  books. 

Tertullian,  [De  Cultu  Foeminarum  Lib.  I.  3,]  approves 
the  Book  of  Henoch.  "I  know,"  he  says,  "that  the  work  of 
Henoch  which  gives  such  order  to  the  Angels  is  by  some  not 
received,  because  it  is  not  admitted  in  the  Jewish  deposit.  I 
believe  that  they  judge  that  the  book  written  before  the 
deluge  could  not  endure  after  such  universal  abolition  of  all 
things.  If  that  is  their  plea,  let  them  remember  that  the 
great  grandson  of  Henoch  survived  the  cataclysm  of  Noah ; 
and  he,  forsooth,  had  heard  and  memorized  in  the  domestic 
tradition  his  ancient  progenitor's  favor  with  God,  and  all 
his  noted  deeds;  since  Henoch  commended  naught  else  to 
his  son,  except  that  he  hand  down  these  things  to  posterity. 
Therefore,  without  doubt,  Noah  could  succeed  in  the  line  of 
the  tradition;  and,  moreover,  he  (Noah)  would  not  have 
kept  silent  the  disposition  of  God,  his  preserver,  and  the 
glory  of  his  house.  Moreover,  by  the  Holy  Spirit  he  (Noah) 
could  have  restored  the  Scripture  that  perished  in  the  deluge, 
in  the  manner  that  Ezra  restored  the  Jewish  literature  that 
was  destroyed  in  the  Babylonian  captivity.  Wherefore, 
since  Henoch  in  that  same  Scripture  announces  concerning 
the  Lord,  in  our  judgment,  nothing  is  to  be  rejected.  And 
we  read  [IL  Tim.  III.  16.]:  'All  Scripture  having  power 
to  edify  is  divinely  inspired.'  It  may  rightly  be  thought 
that  it  is  rejected  by  the  Jews  in  the  same  manner  as  the 
other  things  which  treat  of  Christ.  Nor  is  it  surprising  that 
they  reject  the  Scriptures  which  treat  of  him  whom  they 
rejected  when  he  spoke  in  person  to  them.  We  add  that 
Henoch  has  a  testimony  in  the  Epistle  of  Jude  the  iVpostle, 
(Jude  I.  14.)." 

We  shall  see  later  on  that  Tertullian  errs  in  saying  that 
St.  Jude  quotes  from  Henoch.  The  sentence  of  Jude  was 
taken  from  a  tradition,  which  afterwards  formed  the  basis 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH 


359 


of  the  Apocryphal  book  of  Henoch.  The  Epistle  of  Barna- 
bas [IV.  3 ;  XVI.  6.]  quotes  as  divine  Scripture  the  Book  of 
Henoch;  Clement  of  Alexandria  quotes  the  IV.  Book  of 
Ezra  as  ''Ezra  the  prophet."     [III.  Strom.  i6.] 

St.  Athanasius,  Apolog.  Ad 
Imp.  II. 

"Hanc  cum  Zorobabel  sap- 
iens ille  vir  ceteris  anteferret, 
alios  superavit,  universusque 
populus  in  hanc  vocem  proru- 
pit:  'Magna  est  Veritas  et 
prae valet.'  " 

Idem  Sermo  Major  de  Fide, 

35- 

"QuemadmodumetEzra  pro- 
phetic© spiritu  dicit  ex  persona 
Zorobabelis,  idque  de  Filio  Dei; 
'Vivit  Veritas,  et  vincit,  et  ro- 
boratur,  manetque  in  saecula 
saeculonim.'  " 


III.  Ezra  IV.  41. 

"Et  desiit  loquendo.  Et  om- 
nes  populi  clamaverunt,  et 
dixerunt:  Magna  est  Veritas,  et 
praevalet." 


Ibid.  IV.  37-41-47. 

"Et  omnes  populi  clamave- 
runt, et  dixerunt:  Magna  est 
Veritas,  et  praevalet." 


Origen  quotes  from  the  same  book : 

Orig.  Comment,  in  Josue,  VI. 
Ex  praefatione. 

"Quia  Ezrae  tempore  cum  vi- 
num  et  inimicum,  regem  ac  de- 
nique  mulieres  vincit  Veritas, 
reaedificatur  templum  Dei." 

Orig.  In    Lib.    Josue,    Horn. 

III.  Ezra  IV.  59,  60.  IX.  10. 

" — et  dixit:  Abs  te  est  vie-  " — ita   ut   et   nos   dicamus, 

toria,  et  abs  te  est  sapientia  et  sicut    in    Ezra    scriptum    est: 

claritas.      Et  ego  servus  tuus  'Quia  a  te,  Domine, est  victoria, 

sum.  Benedictus  es,  qui  dedisti  et  ego  servus  tuus:  benedictus 

mihi  sapientiam,  et  tibi  confite-  es,  Deus  veritatis.'  " 
bor,  Domine  Deus  patrum  nos- 
trorum." 

The  chain  of  tradition  is  not  broken  by  these  few  isolated 
references  to  some  of  the  Apocrypha.  In  these  few  cases, 
the  Fathers  are  exponents  of  their  individual  opinions,  and 


360  THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY 

are  to  be  valued  only  as  mere  individuals.  They  do  not 
quote  the  Apocrypha  as  witnesses  of  the  belief  of  the  Church. 
The  absolute  line  between  the  Canonical  and  Apocryphal 
books  had  not  been  promulgated  by  any  definite  authority, 
and,  using  their  liberty  as  individuals,  some  few  erroneously 
extended  inspiration  to  certain  books  which  never  were 
factors  in  the  life  of  the  Church.  This  critical  error  then 
of  the  Fathers  in  these  rare  cases,  prevails  not  against  the 
solemn  universal  witness  that  the  writers  of  these  early  ages 
bear  to  the  approbation  of  the  deuterocanonical  books,  in 
the  practical  usage  of  the  Christian  people. 

Relying  upon  the  certain  data  that  we  have  adduced,  we 
assert  that  if  tradition  be  taken  as  the  criterion  of  inspira- 
tion, and  if  the  traditions  are  most  valued  that  go  back 
closest  to  the  Apostolic  age,  then  the  deuterocanonical 
books  of  Holy  Writ  rest  on  a  solid  foundation. 

•     Chapter  VIII. 

The  Canon  of  the  Fathers  of  the    Fourth    Century 
AND  First  Years  of  Fifth  Century. 

In  this  period  the  unanimity  which  prevailed  for  the 
first  three  centuries  is  somewhat  broken,  especially  by 
Jerome.  The  doubts  which  arose  in  this  age  concerning  the 
deuterocanonical  books  prevailed  more  especially  in  the 
East.  We  find,  however,  that  not  one  of  the  Fathers  of  this 
epoch,  excepting  Jerome,  rejected  the  deuterocanonical 
books.  Their  opposition  to  them  never  passed  beyond  a 
mere  doubt  concerning  them.  We  find,  also,  in  this  period, 
many  in  the  East  and  in  the  West,  who  defend  a  canon 
identical  with  the  Canon  of  Trent.  Lastly,  we  find  that 
*  'the  very  men  w^ho  give  a  list  of  the  Jewish  books,  evince  an 
inclination  to  the  Christian  and  enlarged  Canon."  Thus, 
we  see,  that  the  practical  tradition  of  the  Church  was  so 
powerful  that  it  overcame  in  the  life  of  the  Church  the 
doubts  of  individual  men  and  isolated  churches. 

As  we  come  down  from  the  first  ages  of  the  Church  the 
patristic  data  multiply,  and,  hence,  we  could  not  set  forth 
here  every  particular  writer's  views  and  use  of  Holy  Scrip- 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY  361 

ture.  Neither  is  such  now  necessary.  No  one  will  deny 
that  in  this  period  Jerome  is  the  only  positive  opponent  of 
the  deuterocanonical  books.  All  likewise  recognize  that 
the  most  and  the  greatest  of  the  Fathers  of  this  epoch  re- 
ceived these  books  as  divine  Scripture.  Many  adduce  here 
the  authority  of  the  Council  of  Nice,  325.  They  believe  that 
in  that  council  there  was  formulated  a  catalogue  of  books 
which  included  the  deuterocanonical  Scripture.  The  proofs 
for  the  assertion  of  this  are  so  feeble  that  we  pretermit  it 
here  as  worthless  to  establish  our  theory.* 

The  Council  of  Hippo  A.  D.  393,  the  Council  of  Carthage 
A.  D.  397,  and  the  second  Council  of  Carthage  in  419  A.  D. 
officially  promulgated  canons  of  Scripture  which  included  all 
the  deuterocanonical  books. 

Council  of  Hippo,  Can.  36 : 

'The  Synod  defines  that  besides  the  canonical  Scrip- 
tures nothing  be  read  in  the  Church  under  the  name  of 

♦Comely  defends  the  genuineness  of  the  canon  of  Scripture  of  the  Coun- 
cil of  Nice.     Among  his  proofs  are  the  following: 

1.  St,  Jerome  in  his  preface  to  Judith  declares  that  the  Nicene  Synod 
is  said  to  have  included  the  book  of  Judith  among  the  canonical  Scrip- 
tures. The  proving  force  of  this  testimony  is  not  very  great,  for  any  ap- 
probation of  the  book  in  the  deliberations  of  the  Council,  would  justify 
Jerome's  statement.  We  believe  that  the  Nicene  fathers  recognized  the 
deuterocanonical  books  as  divine  Scripture,  but  we  hold  that  it  is  not 
sufficiently  substantiated  by  historical  data,  that  they  drew  up  an  official 
list  of  the  Holy  Scriptures.  Had  they  done  so,  it  would  have  had  a  greater 
influence  on  the  trend  of  thought  of  the  Greek  fathers.  St.  Athanasius 
would  not  have  declared  that  it  was  a  bold  and  difficult  thing  to  fix  the 
list  of  the  Holy  Books,  had  there  been  promulgated  a  catalogue  of  the 
same  by  a  council  of  which  he  was  an  important  factor,  and  whose  de- 
cisions he  venerated. 

2.  Comely  quotes  some  obscure  words  from  Cassiodorus,  reproduced 
from  Hefele  Conciliengesch.  II.  p.  486;  but  they  form  no  forcible  proof. 

3.  Comely  also  adduces  the  36th  canon  of  the  Council  of  Hippo,  A.  D. 
393:  "Ut  praeter  Scripturas  Catholicas,  nihil  in  Ecclesia  legatur.  Capituli 
XXIV.  Nicaeni  Concilii.  Item  ut  praster  Scripturas  Catholicas  nihil  in 
ecclesia  legatiir  sub  nomine  divinarum  Scrip turarum.  Sunt  autem  Can- 
onicse  Scripturas,"  etc.  The  books  of  both  canons  are  there  mentioned. 
This  Canon  exists  but  in  one  sole  codex  in  the  Vallicellian  library,  in 
Rome.  We  are  not  disposed  to  detract  from  what  force  it  may  have,  but 
we  do  not  feel  warranted  to  refer  the  Council  of  Nice  among  the  proofs 
of  the  Canon  in  the  fourth  century.  Hefele  accords  no  certain  authority 
to  the  aforesaid  Canon. 


362  THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY 

divine  Scripture.  The  Canonical  Scriptures  are:  Genesis, 
Exodus,  Leviticus,  Numbers,  Deuteronomy,  Josue,  Judges, 
Ruth,  four  books  of  Kings  (Regnorum),  ParaHpomena  two 
books.  Job,  the  Davidic  Psalter,  the  five  hooks  of  Solomon, 
the  twelve  (minor)  Prophets,  Isaiah,  Jeremiah,  Daniel,  Eze- 
chiel,  Tobias,  Judith,  Esther,  Ezra  two  books,  Maccabees  two 
books."  The  first  Council  of  Carthage,  397  A.  D.,  confirms 
the  same  canon. 

The  second  Council  of  Carthage,  419  A.  D.,  has  the  fol- 
lowing :  ' '  It  is  decreed  that  nothing  but  the  canonical  Scrip- 
tures may  be  read  under  the  name  of  divine  Scripture.  The 
canonical  Scriptures  are  the  following :  Of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, Genesis,  .  .  .  Job,  the  Psalter,  five  books  of  Solomon, 
the  Prophets,  Isaiah,  Jeremiah,  Daniel,  (Ezekiel  is  wanting) 
the  Twelve  (minor)  Prophets,  Tobias,  Judith,  Esther,  two 
books  of  Ezra,  two  books  of  Maccabees.  .  .  .  This  decree  shall 
be  made  known  to  our  brother  and  fellow  priest  Boniface,  the 
Bishop  of  Rome,  or  even  to  the  other  bishops  for  its  con- 
firmation; for  we  have  received  from  the  Fathers,  that  thus  {the 
Scriptures)  should  be  read  in  the  Church.'' 

Some  have  found  it  strange  that  the  three  African  Coun- 
cils were  held  at  such  short  intervals.  The  reason  of  the 
repetitions  of  the  Canon  seems  to  be  the  fact  that  Catho- 
lic thought  had  been  disturbed  in  those  days  by  Jerome,  who 
in  his  Prologus  Galeatus  to  the  Books  of  Kings,  rejected 
out  of  the  Canon  the  deuterocanonical  books,  A.  D.  390. 
Repeatedly  in  his  subsequent  labors,  he  inveighs  against  the 
deuterocanonical  books  and  fragments,  and  it  was  to  retain 
the  Catholics  faithful  to  their  old  traditions  that  these  three 
councils  repeat  their  Canons  in  such  quick  succession. 

No  doubt  can  reasonably  exist  regarding  St.  Augustine's 
attitude  towards  the  deuterocanonical  Scriptures.  He  was 
an  important  factor  in  the  three  councils  just  mentioned; 
and  repeatedly  in  his  works  he  declares  himself  clearly  for 
the  deuterocanonical  books.  It  would  be  a  long  and  need- 
less task  to  set  forth  Augustine's  use  of  deuterocanonical 
Scripture.  It  will  not  be  contradicted  by  any  patristic 
scholar  that  Augustine  held  in  equal  veneration  the  proto- 
canonical  and  deuterocanonical  books.     He  gives  his  views 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY  363 

of  Scripture  and  a  complete  canon  in  the   Enchiridion  of 
Christian  Doctrine,  Book  II.  VIII.: 

"But  let  us  now  go  back  to  consider  the  third  step  here 
mentioned,  for  it  is  about  it  that  I  have  set  myself  to  speak 
and  reason  as  the  Lord  shall  grant  me  wisdom.  The  most 
skillful  interpreter  of  the  sacred  writings,  then,  will  be  he 
who  in  the  first  place  has  read  them  all  and  retained  them 
in  his  knowledge,  if  not  yet  with  full  understanding,  still  with 
such  knowledge  as  reading  gives — those  of  them,  at  least, 
that  are  called  canonical.  For  we  will  read  the  others  with 
greater  safety  when  built  up  in  the  belief  of  the  truth,  so  that 
they  will  not  take  first  possession  of  a  weak  mind,  nor, 
cheating  it  with  dangerous  falsehoods  and  delusions,  fill  it 
with  prejudices  adverse  to  a  sound  understanding.  Now, 
in  regard  to  the  canonical  Scriptures,  he  must  follow  the 
judgment  of  the  greater  nimiber  of  Catholic  Churches ;  and 
among  these,  of  course,  a  high  place  must  be  given  to  such  as 
have  been  thought  worthy  to  be  the  seat  of  an  Apostle  and 
to  receive  epistles.  Accordingl}^  among  the  canonical  Scrip- 
tures he  will  judge  according  to  the  following  standards :  to 
prefer  those  that  are  received  by  all  the  Catholic  Churches 
to  those  which  some  do  not  receive.  Among  those,  again, 
which  are  not  received  by  all,  he  will  prefer  such  as  have  the 
sanction  of  the  greater  number  and  those  of  greater  author- 
ity, to  such  as  are  held  by  the  smaller  number  and  those  of 
less  authority.  If,  however,  he  shall  find  that  some  books 
are  held  by  the  greater  number  of  churches,  and  others  by 
the  churches  of  greater  authority  (though  this  is  not  a  very 
likely  thing  to  happen),  I  think,  that  in  such  a  case,  the 
authority  on  the  two  sides  is  to  be  looked  upon  as  equal. 
Now  the  whole  Canon  of  Scripture  on  which  we  say  this  judg- 
ment is  to  be  exercised  is  contained  in  the  following  books : 
— Five  books  of  Moses,  that  is :  Genesis,  Exodus,  Leviticus, 
Numbers,  Deuteronomy ;  one  book  of  Joshua  the  son  of  Nim ; 
one  of  Judges;  one  short  book  called  Rtith,  which  seems 
rather  to  belong  to  the  beginning  of  Kings ;  next,  four  books 
of  Kings  and  two  of  Chronicles — these  last  not  following  one 
another,  but  running  parallel,  so  to  speak,  and  going  over 
the  same  groimd.     The  books  now  mentioned  are  history, 


364  THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY 

which  contains  a  connected  narrative  of  the  times,  and  fol- 
lows the  order  of  the  events.  There  are  other  books  which 
seem  to  follow  no  regular  order,  and  are  connected  neither 
with  the  order  of  the  preceding  books  nor  with  one  another, 
such  as  Job,  and  Tobias,  and  Esther,  and  Judith,  and  the  two 
books  of  Maccabees  and  the  two  of  Ezra,  which  last  look 
more  like  a  sequel  to  the  continuous  regular  history  which 
terminates  with  the  books  of  Kings  and  Chronicles.  Next 
are  the  Prophets,  in  which  there  is  one  book  of  the  Psalms  of 
David;  and  three  books  of  Solomon,  viz. :  Proverbs,  Song  of 
Songs,  and  Ecclesiastes.  For  two  books,  one  called  Wisdom 
and  the  other  Ecclesiasticus,  are  ascribed  to  Solomon  from  a 
certain  resemblance  of  style,  but  the  most  likely  opinion  is 
that  they  were  written  by  Jesus,  the  son  of  Sirach.  Still 
they  are  to  be  reckoned  among  the  prophetical  books,  since 
they  have  attained  recognition  as  being  authoritative.  The 
remainder  are  the  books  which  are  strictly  called  the  Proph- 
ets: twelve  separate  books  of  the  Prophets  which  are  con- 
nected with  one  another,  and  having  never  been  disjoined, 
are  reckoned  as  one  book ;  the  names  of  these  prophets  are  as 
follows: — Hosea,  Joel,  Amos,  Obadiah,  Jonah,  Micha,  Na- 
hum,  Habakkuk,  Zephaniah,  Haggai,  Zechariah,  Malachi; 
then  there  are  the  four  greater  Prophets,  Isaiah,  Jeremiah, 
Daniel,  Ezekiel.  The  authority  of  the  Old  Testament  is 
contained  within  the  limits  of  these  forty-four  books.  That 
of  the  New  Testament,  again,  is  contained  within  the  follow- 
ing:— Fotir  books  of  the  Gospel,  according  to  Matthew,  ac- 
cording to  Mark,  according  to  Luke,  according  to  John; 
fourteen  epistles  of  the  Apostle  Paul —  one  to  the  Romans, 
two  to  the  Corinthians,  one  to  the  Galatians,  to  the  Ephe- 
sians,  to  the  Philippians,  two  to  the  Thessalonians,  one  to 
the  Colossians,  two  to  Timothy,  one  to  Titus,  to  Philemon, 
to  the  Hebrews;  two  of  Peter,  three  of  John,  one  of  Jude, 
and  one  of  James ;  one  book  of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  and 
one  of  the  Revelation  of  John." 

St.  Augustine's  practical  use  of  the  deuterocanonical 
books  may  be  judged  from  his  De  Civitate  Dei  and  Contra 
Manichaeos  taken  as  specimens.  In  the  former  work,  he 
has  fifteen  quotations  from  Wisdom,  fourteen  from  Ecclesi- 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY  365 

asticus,  two  from  Baruch,  Judith,  and  Tobias  respectively, 
and  one  from  the  "  Benedicite"  of  Daniel.  In  his  work  against 
the  Manicheans  he  has  twenty-three  quotations  from  Wis- 
dom, six  from  Ecclesiasticus,  two  from  Tobias,  one  from 
Baruch  and  one  from  the  Maccabees.  In  his  work  Contra 
Fausttim  XXXIII.  9,  he  promulgates  the  Catholic  criterion 
of  the  canonical  Scriptures:  "I  admonish  briefly  you,  who 
hold  the  execrable  error  (of  the  Manicheans),  if  ye  wish  to 
follow  the  authority  of  that  Scripture  which  is  to  be  pre- 
ferred to  all  others,  that  ye  follow  that  Scripture  which 
from  the  time  of  Christ,  through  the  dispensations  of  the 
Apostles,  and  of  the  Bishops,  who  succeeded  them  in  their 
sees  by  certain  succession,  has  come  down  even  to  our  day, 
preserved  throughout  the  whole  earth,  approved  and  ex- 
plained." Chemnitz,  objected  against  Augustine's  author- 
ity for  the  deuterocanonical  Scripture,  citing  a  passage  from^ 
his  Contra  Gaudentium,  XXXI.  38:  **And  indeed  the 
Scripture  which  is  called  the  Maccabees  the  Jews  have  not,  as 
they  have  the  Law,  the  Prophets,  and  the  Psalms,  to  which 
the  Lord  bears  testimony  as  to  his  witnesses  saying :  That 
all  things  must  needs  be  fulfilled  which  are  written  in  the 
Law  of  Moses,  and  in  the  Prophets,  and  in  the  Psalms  con- 
cerning me'  (Luke  XXIV.  44) ;  but  it  (Maccabees)  is  re- 
ceived by  the  Church  not  unprofitably,  if  it  be  soberly  read 
or  heard.''  This  is  a  direct  testimony  that  the  Church,  to 
whom  Augustine  directed  all  who  would  receive  the  genuine 
Scripture,  had  received  and  sanctioned  a  book  not  contained 
in  the  Jewish  Canon,  and  that  such  book  was  not  without 
profit  to  readers  and  hearers.  Later  on  in  the  same  chapter 
he  explains  what  he  means  by  the  restrictive  clause:  ''if  it 
be  soberly  read  or  heard."  "For  we  should  not,"  he  says, 
'  'assenting  approve  all  things  that  we  read  in  the  Scriptures 
that  men  did,  even  though  they  be  praised  by  the  testimony 
of  God ;  but  we  should  consider  and  discern,  using  the  judg- 
ment not  of  our  own  authority,  but  of  the  divine  and  holy 
Scriptures,  which  does  not  permit  us  to  approve  or  imitate 
all  the  deeds  of  those  to  whom  it  bears  a  good  and  excellent 
testimony."  Augustine's  words  restrict  not  the  authority 
of  Maccabees  beneath  divine  Scripture,  but  regulate  its  use. 


366  THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY 

The  same  words  might  have  been  appHed  by  him  to  the 
Gospel  of  Matthew. 

There  are  sometimes  alleged  against  us  the  words  of 
Augustine  which  occur  Lib.  Retract.  X.  3:  "Thus  also  I 
appear  not  to  have  rightly  called  the  words  prophetic  in 
which  it  is  written:  'Quid  superbit  terra  et  cinis?'  Eccli.  X.  9, 
since  they  are  not  written  in  the  book  of  one  whom  we  cer- 
tainly know  to  have  been  a  prophet."  We  believe  that  it  is 
not  the  intention  of  Augustine  here  to  throw  doubt  on 
Ecclesiasticus,  but  to  be  accurate  in  drawing  a  distinction 
between  prophets  and  hagiographers.  Such  subtlety  leaves 
intact  a  book's  divinity. 

In  the  first  book  of  his  De  Predestinatione  Sanctorum 
XIV.  against  the  Pelagians,  who  rejected  the  book  of  Wis- 
dom, Augustine  argues  thus:  ''These  things  being  so,  there 
should  not  be  rejected  a  sentence  from  the  book  of  Wisdom, 
which  has  merited  to  be  read  by  the  order  of  lectors  in  the 
Church  of  Christ  for  so  many  years  (tam  longa  annositate), 
and  which  has  merited  to  be  listened  to  with  the  veneration 
of  divine  authority  by  all  Christians,  from  bishops  to  the 
extreme  lay  faithful  penitents  and  catechumens."  Iterum 
ibidem:  "But  those  who  wish  to  be  taught  by  the  works 
of  the  Fathers  (Tractatorum)  must  needs  prefer  the  book  of 
Wisdom  to  all  the  Fathers ;  for  the  celebrated  Fathers  near- 
est in  time  to  the  Apostles  preferred  it  to  their  own  opinions ; 
and  they,  using  it  as  an  authority,  believed  that  they  were 
making  use  of  nothing  short  of  a  divine  testimony. 

*Tt  is  evident,  that  with  Augustine,  the  condition  of  all 
the  deuterocanonical  books  was  the  same ;  hence  by  applying 
this  testimony  to  the  entire  collection  we  have  not  alone 
the  view  of  Augustine,  but  a  succinct  statement  of  the  belief 
and  usage  of  the  Church  from  the  Apostles  to  his  own  day. 

A  document  which  sets  forth  the  official  attitude 
towards  the  deuterocan^cal  Scripture  in  this  age  is  the 
Decree  of  Pope  Gelasius,  A.  D.  492-A.  D.  496.* 

*This  decree  is  not  found  the  same  in  the  different  codices.  It  is  by 
some  ascribed  to  Damasus  (A.  D.  366 — A.  D.  384) ;  by  others  to  Gelasius 
(A.  D.  492 — A.  D.  496);  and  by  others  to  Hormisdas  (A.  D.  514 — A,  D. 
523)  Comely  believes  that  it  was  originally  a  decree  of  Damasus  which 
was  afterwards  enlarged  by  Gelasius  All  agree  that  it  was  an  authentic 
promulgation  from  the  Roman  see  in  that  period.  [Hefele  Conciliengesch. 
II.  620.] 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY  367 

''Nunc  vero  de  Scripturis  divinis  agendum  est  quid  uni- 
versalis recipiat  Ecclesia,  vel  quid  vitare  debeat.  Incipit 
ordo  Veteris  Testamenti,  Genesis  liber  I.  Exodi  liber  I. 
Levitici  liber  I.  Numeri  liber  I.  Deuteronomii  liber  I.  Jesu 
Nave  liber  I.  Judicum  liber  I.  Ruth  liber  I.  Regum  libri  IV. 
Paralipomenon  libri  II.  Psalmorum  CL.  liber  I.  Salomonis 
libri  III.  Proverbia  liber  I.  Ecclesiastes  liber  I.  Cantici  Can- 
ticorum  liber  I.  Item  SapienticB  liber  I.  Ecclesiastici  liber  I. 
Item  ordo  Prophetarum:  Esaias  liber  I.  Jeremiae  liber  I.  cum 
Chinoth,  id  est,  Lamentationibus  suis,  Ezechielis  liber  I. 
Danielis  liber  I.  Osea  liber  I.  Amos  liber  I.  Michaeae  liber  I. 
Joel  liber  I.  Abdiae  liber  I.  Jonae  liber  I.  Nahum  liber  I.  Ab- 
bacuc  liber  I.  Aggasi  liber  I.  Zachariae  liber  I.  Malachi  liber  I. 
Item  ordo  historiarum:  Job  liber  I.  ab  aliis  omissus.  Tohi<B 
liber  I.  Hesdras  libri  II.  Hesther  liber  I.  Judith  liber  I.  Mach- 
abseorum  libri  II." 

In  the  year  405,  St.  Exuperius,  Bishop  of  Toulouse 
(t4i7)  wrote  to  Pope  Innocent  I.  asking  among  other  things 
''what  books  should  be  received  in  the  Canon  of  Holy  Scrip- 
ture." The  Pontiff  responds:  "The  subjoined  brief  will 
show  what  books  should  be  received  into  the  Canon  of  Holy 
Scripture.  These  are  therefore  (the  books)  concerning  which 
thou  hast  wished  the  admonition  of  a  longed  for  voice.  The 
five  books  of  Moses.  .  .  .  The  book  of  Jesus,  son  of  Nave, 
one  book  of  Judges,  the  four  books  of  Kings  and  Ruth,  six- 
teen books  of  Prophets,  five  hooks  of  Solomon,  the  Psalter; 
also  of  historical  books,  one  book  of  Job,  one  of  Tobias,  one 
of  Esther,  one  of  Judith,  two  of  Maccabees,  two  of  Ezra  and 
two  of  Paralipomenon."  In  all  these  canons  Baruch  is  con- 
sidered an  integral  part  of  Jeremiah.  The  canons  of  Gelasius 
and  Innocent  are  not  ex  cathedra  definitions,  but  plain  state- 
ments of  the  belief  and  usages  of  the  Church  from  her  central 
authority. 

The  testimony  of  the  fourth  and  fifth  centuries  to  the 
divinity  of  the  deuterocanonical  Scriptures  is  evinced  in  the 
four  great  codices  of  that  period :  the  Vatican  and  Sinaitic 
of  the  fourth  century,  and  the  Alexandrian  and  Codex  of 
St.  Ephrem  of  the  fifth  century.  An  accurate  description  of 
these  codices  will  be  given  in  the  course  of  our  treatise. 


368  THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY 

Suffice  it  to  say  here  that  they  all  make  no  discrimination 
between  the  protocanonical  and  deuterocanonical  books. 

The  Ethiopian  version  of  Scripture,  made  in  the  fourth 
century,  and  the  Armenian  version,  made  in  the  beginning 
of  the  fifth  century,  contain  all  the  books  canonized  by  the 
Council  of  Trent.  At  what  time  the  deuterocanonical  books 
were  placed  in  the  Syriac  translation  known  as  the  Peshito 
is  not  known,  but  they  were  there  in  the  time  of  St.  Ephrem 
(t379)»  as  we  shall  see  in  the  course  of  the  present  work; 
hence,  we  may  add  the  testimony  of  the  Syriac  Peshito  to 
the  data  for  the  deuterocanonical  books. 

Sacred  archasology  also  affords  proofs  for  the  divinity  of 
the  deuterocanonical  books.  In  the  Catacombs,  we  find 
frequent  representations  from  the  deuterocanonical  books, 
proving  that  those  books  were  a  part  of  the  deposit  of  faith 
of  the  Church  of  the  Martyrs.  The  recent  researches  in  sub- 
terranean Rome  have  clearly  demonstrated  this  proof,  as  can 
be  seen  in  the  works  of  Vincenzi  (Sessio  IV.  Cone.  Trid.) ; 
Malou  (Lecture  de  la  Bible  II.  144) ;  Garrucci  (Storia  dell' 
Arte  Christiana),  and  others.  The  constant  and  universal 
tradition  and  usage  of  the  first  three  centuries  are  corrobo- 
rated in  the  fourth  and  fifth  century  by  the  express  declara- 
tions and  praxis  of  Fathers,  by  solemn  decrees  of  Councils 
and  Popes,  and  by  the  preserved  evidences  of  the  practical 
life  of  the  Church. 

The  adversaries  of  the  deuterocanonical  books  bring 
against  us  the  authority  of  the  Fathers  who  have  edited 
canons  in  which  the  deuterocanonical  books  find  no  place. 
Preeminent  for  age  and  authority  among  these  is  St.  Ath- 
anasius,  the  decus  orthodoxise.* 

We  reproduce  here  the  entire  quotation  from  which  the 
opposition  of  Athanasius  is  inferred:     ''Since  many  have 

*St.  Athanasius  was  descended  of  an  illustrious  family  of  Alexandria. 
He  was  ordained  deacon  by  St.  Alexander,  whom  in  326  he  succeeded  in 
the  see  of  Alexandria.  He  was  the  Charles  Martel  against  the  Arians  in 
the  Council  of  Nice,  and  combated  this  dreadful  heresy  throughout  his  life. 
His  long  episcopate  of  more  than  forty  years  was  a  perpetually  troubled 
one.  Many  times  he  was  forced  to  fly  to  the  exile  of  the  desert  to  escape 
his  insidious  foes.  He  is  the  great  patristic  authority  on  the  Trinity  and 
the  Incarnation. 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY  369 

indeed  tried  to  place  in  order  those  books  which  are  called 
Apocrypha,  and  mix  them  with  the  divinely  inspired  Scrip- 
ture which  we  have  received  upon  certain  testimony  as  the 
Fathers  handed  down  to  us,  who  from  the  beginning  were  eye- 
witnesses and  ministers  of  the  word,  it  has  seemed  good  to 
me  also,  the  brethren  exhorting,  to  compute  in  the  Canon, 
as  I  have  learned,  from  the  beginning,  and  in  order,  the 
books  that  have  been  handed  down  and  are  believed  to  be 
divine,  that  everyone  that  has  been  seduced  may  convict 
the  seducers,  and  he  who  has  persevered  incorrupt  may 
joyously  remember  these.  The  books  of  the  Old  Testament 
are  in  number  twenty -tivo ;  for  so  many,  as  I  have  heard,  are 
the  elements  (of  speech)  with  the  Hebrews.  In  this  order, 
and  by  these  names,  they  are  severally  enumerated:  The 
first  is  Genesis,  then  Exodus,  Leviticus,  Numbers,  Detiteron- 
omy,  Joshua  son  of  Nun,  Judges  and  Ruth  follow;  then  the 
four  books  of  Kings,  of  which  the  first  and  second  are  con- 
sidered as  one,  and,  in  like  manner,  the  third  and  fourth. 
Following  these  the  two  books  of  Paralipomenon  are  also  con- 
sidered as  one,  as  also  the  first  and  second  of  Ezra.  Then 
come  the  book  of  Psalms,  Proverbs,  Ecclesiastes,  the  Can- 
ticle of  Canticles  and  Job ;  then  the  Prophets,  of  whom  twelve 
are  considered  as  one  book.  Then  Isaiah,  Jeremiah  and 
with  him  Baruch,  the  Lamentations,  and  the  Epistle;  then 
follow  Ezechiel  and  Daniel,  thus  far  the  books  of  the  Old 
Testament." 

After  enumerating  the  complete  Canon  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment, he  continues:  ''These  are  the  fountains  of  salvation, 
so  that  who  thirsts  may  be  filled  by  their  discourses ;  in  these 
alone,  the  Christian  doctrine  is  taught.  Let  no  one  add  to 
them  or  take  anything  from  them.  But  for  greater  accuracy,  I 
deem  it  necessary  to  add  this  also,  that  there  are,  forsooth, 
other  books  besides  these,  which,  indeed,  are  not  placed  in  the 
Canon,  but  which  the  Fathers  decreed  should  be  read  to  those 
who  have  lately  come  into  the  fold,  and  seek  to  be  catechized,  and 
who  study  to  learn  the  Christian  doctrine.  (These  are) :  The 
Wisdom  of  vSolomon  and  the  Wisdom  of  Sirach  (Ecclesias- 
ticus),  Esther,  Judith,  Tobias,  the  so-called  Doctrine  of  the 
Apostles,  and  Pastor.     Therefore,  while  the  former  are  in 

r24)  H.  s. 


370  THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY 

the  Canon,  and  these  latter  are  read,  there  is  no  mention  of  the 
Apocrypha,  which  are  the  figment  of  heretics  who  arbitrarily 
write  books,  to  which  they  assign  dates,  that  by  the  specious 
semblance  of  antiquity  they  may  find  occasion  to  deceive 
the  simple."     [Ep.  Fest.  29.] 

To  judge  rightly  St.  Athanasius'  attitude  towards  Holy 
Scripture,  we  must  recall  what  has  been  said  respecting 
Meliton.  We  must  readily  admit  that  in  these  ages  a  dis- 
tinction was  made  between  the  two  classes  of  books,  but  it  did 
not  deny  divine  inspiration  to  the  deuterocanonical  works.  A 
greater  dignity  was  given  by  some  Fathers  to  the  books  that 
had  come  down  to  the  Church  from  the  Jews ;  but  these  same 
Fathers  testify  to  the  veneration  in  which  the  deuterocanon- 
ical works  were  held  by  the  Church,  and  to  the  part  they 
played  in  the  life  of  the  faithful.  It  must  also  be  borne  in 
mind  that  Athanasius  flourished  in  Alexandria  the  fertile 
source  of  Apocrypha,  and  in  his  zeal  to  repel  the  inventions 
of  heretics  he  was  most  conservative  in  treating  the  Canon. 
His  location  of  Esther  among  the  deuterocanonical  books 
is  unique,  and  was  probably  caused  by  the  sanguinary 
character  of  the  book,  which  also  led  some  Jews  to  doubt  of 
its  divine  inspiration. 

His  omission  of  Maccabees  seems  to  be  an  oversight  since 
he  adverts  to  their  history  in  his  writings.  We  do  not  seek 
to  establish  that  the  status  of  the  two  classes  of  books  was 
the  same  with  Athanasius ;  but  we  judge  it  evident  from  his 
writings  that  he  venerated  these  same  books  as  divine,  al- 
though not  equal  in  extrinsic  authority  to  the  books  officially 
handed  down  from  the  Jews.  The  testimony  of  Athanasius 
that  the  Fathers  of  the  Church  had  decreed  that  these  books 
should  be  read  in  the  Church  manifests  clearly  the  Church's 
attitude  towards  these  books;  and  the  following  passages 
taken  from  the  writings  of  Athanasius  show  how  deeply  he 
also  had  dnmk  from  these  fotints. 

Athanas.  Oratio  Contra  Gen- 
Sap.  XIV.  12.  tes,  9. 
"  Initium  enim  fornicationis         '' — qnod  et  Dei  sapientia  his 
est  exquisitio  idolorum :  et  adin-     verbis  declarat :   'Initium  fomi- 
ventio   illorum  corruptio   vitae     cationis    est    exquisitio    idolo- 
est — ."                                              rum.'  " 


THE   CANON   OF    THE   IV.  CENTURY 


371 


Sap.  XIV.  12-21. 

* '  Initium  f omicationis , 


etc. 


Sap.  XIV.  21. 

"Et  hsec  fuit  vitas  humanse 
deceptio:  quoniam  aut  affectui, 
aut  regibus  deservientes  hom- 
ines, incommunicabile  nomen 
lapidibus  et  lignis  imposuer- 
unt." 

Sap.  XIII.  5. 

" — a  magnitudine  enim  spe- 
ciei,  et  creaturae  cognoscibiliter 
potent  Creator  horum  videri." 

Sap.  VI.  19. 

"Cura  ergo  disciplinae  dilec- 
tio  est:  et  dilectio  custodia  le- 
gum  illius  est:  custoditio  autem 
legum  consummatio  incorrup- 
tionis  est — ." 


Ibid. 

"Haec  .  .  .  jam  olim  Scriptura 
his  verbis  complexa  est:  'In- 
itium f omicationis,'  "  etc.  Per- 
git  usque  ad  Vers.  21. 

Ibid.  17. 

** — sed  cum  incommunicab- 
ile, ut  loquitur  Scriptura,  Dei 
nomen  et  honorem  iis  qui  non 
dii  sed  mortales  homines  fuere 
ascribere  studuerunt — . ' ' 


Ibid.  44. 

"Ex  magnitudine  et  pulchri- 
tudine  rerum  creatarum  con- 
venienter  Creator  conspicitur." 

S.  Athanas.  De  Incamatione 
Dei,  4. 

" — sicuti  Sapientia  ait:  *0b- 
servatio  legum  confirmatio  est 
incorruptionis." 


Sap.  II.  23,  24. 

**  Quoniam  Deus  creavit  hom- 
inem  inexterminabilem,  et  ad 
imaginem  similitudinis  suae 
fecit  ilium.  Invidia  autem 
diaboli  mors  introivit  in 
orbem  terrarum — ." 


Sap.  I.  II. 

"Custodite  ergo  vos  a  mur- 
muratione,  quae  nihil  prodest, 
et  a  detractione  parcite  linguae, 
quoniam  sermo  obscurus  in  va- 
cuum non  ibit:  os  autem,  quod 
mentitur,  occidit  animam." 


Ibid. 

** — ^ut  et  Sapientia  his  verbis 
testatur:  *Deus  creavit  hom- 
inem  ut  incorruptus  esset,  et 
imaginem  propriae  aetemitatis; 
invidia  autem  diaboli  mors 
introivit  in  mundum.'  " 

Ath.  Apolog.  et  Contra  Aria- 
nos,  3. 

" — nee  timeant  illud  quod  in 
Sacris  Litteris  scriptum  est  .  .  . 
'Os  quod  mentitur  occidit  ani- 
mam.' " 


372 


THE   CANON   OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY 


Tob.  XII.  7.  Ibid.  II. 

"Sacramentum  regis  abscon-         ** — cum  oporteat,   ut  scrip- 
dere,"  etc.  turn  est:   'Sacramentum  regis 

abscondere.'  " 

This  quotation  is  not  made  use  of  by  Athanasius,  but  is 
found  in  an  apologetic  treatise  directed  to  him  by  a  synod 
held  at  Alexandria,  of  the  bishops  of  Egypt,  Thebais,  Libya 
and  Pentapolis.  It  is  thus  the  testimony  of  the  East  to  the 
divinity  of  the  deuterocanonical  works. 

In  the  letter  of  St.  Alexander  of  Alexandria  to  his  co- 
laborer  we  find  the  following : 


Eccli.  XXX.  4. 

"Mortuus  est  pater  ejus,  et 
quasi  non  est  mortuus :  similem 
enim  reliquit  sibi  post  se." 

Baruch  III.  12. 
"Dereliquisti  fontem  sapien- 
tise^." 

Ibid. 


Sap.  VIII.  25. 

"Vapor    est    enim    virtu  tis 
Dei,"  etc. 


Eccli.  XV.  9. 

**Non  est  speciosa  laus  in  ore 
peccatoris." 

Sap.  I.  II. 

(Already  quoted.) 


Ibid.  66. 

"Mortuus  est  enim,  ait  quo- 
dam  in  loco  S.  Scriptura,  pater 
ejus  et  quasi  non  est  mortuus." 

St.  Ath.  De  Decretis  Synod. 
Nicenae,  12. 

"Verbum  item  Israelem  ob- 
jurgans  ait:  'Dereliquisti  fon- 
tem  sapientiae.*  " 

Ibid.  15. 

"Hujus  porro  sapientiae  fon- 
tem  esse  Deum  nos  docet  Ba- 
ruch, ubi  videlicet  redarguitur 
Israel  fontem  sapientiae  dereli- 
quisse." 

S.  Ath.  De  Sententia  Diony- 
sii,  15. 

*  * — congruenter  rursum  Chris- 
tus  vapor  dictus  est:  'Est 
enim,'  in  quit,  'vapor  virtutis 
Dei.'  " 

Idem,  Epist.  ad  Episcopos 
^gypti  et  Libyae,  3. 

"Non  est  speciosa  laus  in  ore 
peccatoris." 

Idem  Apolog.  ad  Const.  Imp. 
5- 

"Nam  OS  quod  mentitur  occi- 
dit  animam. 


THE   CANON   OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY 


373 


Tob.  IV.  19. 

"Consilium  semper  a  sap- 
iente  perquire." 

Sap.  III.  5. 

**In  paucis  vexati,  in  multis 
bene  disponentur,  quoniam 
Deus  tentavit  eos,  et  invenit 
illos  dignos  se." 

Sap.  II.  21. 

"Haec  cogitaverunt,  et  errav- 
erunt:  excaecavit  enim  illos  ma- 
litia  eorum." 


Eccl.  XIX.  26. 

"Ex  visu  cognoscitur  vir,  et 
ab  occurso  faciei  cognoscitur 
sensatus." 

Baruch  IV.  20-22. 

"Exui  me  stola  pacis,  indui 
autem  me  sacco  obsecrationis, 
et  clamabo  ad  Altissimum  in 
diebus  meis.  Ego  enim  speravi 
in  aeternum,  salutem  vestram 
et  venit  mihi  gaudium  a  sanc- 
to,"  etc. 


Dan.  XIII.  42. 

"Exclamavit  autem  voce 
magna  Susanna,  et  dixit:  Deus 
aeteme,  qui  absconditorum  es 
cognitor,  qui  nosti  omnia  ante- 
quam  fiant." 

Baruch  III.  12. 

"Dereliquisti  fontem  sapien- 
tiae— ." 


Ibid.  17. 

"Scriptum  est:  *Ab  omni  sa- 
piente  consilium  accipe."  ' 

Idem,  Apolog.  De  Fuga  Sua. 
19. 

"Nam  sicut  aurum  in  fornace 
probatos,  ut  ait  Sapientia,  'in- 
venit illos  Dominus  dignos  se.'" 

Ibid.  71. 

"In  his  itaque  eorum  men- 
tem  excaecavit  malitia." 


Idem,  Contra  Arianos  Orat. 

1.4. 

" — sapientia  ait:  *Ex  verbis 
suis  cognoscitur  vir.'  " 


Ibid.  12. 

"Susanna  quoque  aiebat: 
'Deus  sempiteme.'  Baruch 
item  scripsit:  'Clamabo  ad 
Deum  sempitemum  in  diebus 
meis.'  Et  paulo  post:  'Ego  enim 
speravi  in  sempitemum  sa- 
lutem vestram  et  venit  mihi 
gaudium  a  sancto.'  " 

Ibid.  13. 

"Et  apud  Dan.:  'Exclama- 
vit  voce  magna  Susanna  et 
dixit:  Deus  aeteme,  qui  abscon- 
ditorum es  cognitor,  qui  nosti 
omnia  antequam  fiant.'  " 

Ibid.  19. 

" — item  apud  Baruch  scrip- 
tum  est:  'Dereliquistis  fontem 
sapientiae.'  " 


374 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   IV.   CENTURY 


Eccli.  XXIV.  12. 

"Tunc  praecepit,  et  dixit 
mihi  Creator  omnium:  et  qui 
creavit  me,  requievit  in  taber- 
naculo  meo. — " 

Sap.  XIII.  5. 

** — a  magnitudine  enim  spe- 
ciei  et  creaturae,  cognoscibiliter 
poterit  Creator  horum  videri." 

Judith  XIIL  15. 

" — ^non  enim  quasi  homo,  sic 
Deus  comminabitur,  neque  si- 
cut  fiHus  hominis  ad  iracun- 
diam  inflammabitur." 

Baruch  III.  12. 

(Oft  quoted.) 

Sap.  IX.  2. 

** — et  sapientia  tua  consti- 
tuisti  hominem,  ut  dominare- 
tur  creaturae,  quae  a  te  facta 
est—." 

Baruch  III.  36. 

"Hie  est  Deus  noster,  et  non 
aestimabitur  aHus  adversus 
eum." 

Sap.  VI.  26. 

"Multitudo  autem  sapien- 
tum  sanitas  est  orbis  terrarum: 
et  rex  sapiens  stabilimentum 
populiest." 

Eccli.  I.  10. 

"Et  effudit  illam  super  om- 
nia opera  sua,  et  super  omnem 
camem  secundum  datum  suum 
et  praebuit  illam  diligentibus 
se." 


Idem  Contra  Arianos,  Orat. 

11.4. 

" — vel  si  ipse  de  seipso  ait: 
'Dominus  creavit  me.'  " 


Ibid.  32. 

"Siquidem  ex  magnitudine 
et  pulchritudine  rerum  creat- 
arum,  illarum  Creator  conveni- 
enter  conspicitur." 

Ibid.  35. 

"  'Deus  autem  non  ut  homo 
est,  quemadmodum  testatur 
Scriptura.'  " 

Ibid.  42. 

(Oft  quoted.) 

Ibid.  45- 

"  Et  in  libro  Sapientiae  legitur : 
*Et  sapientia  tua  constituisti 
hominem  ut  dominaretur  cre- 
aturis  quae  a  te  factae  sunt.'  " 

Ibid.  49. 

"Et  Baruch:  'Hie  est  Deus 
noster,  non  aestimabitur  alius 
adversus  eum.'  " 

Ibid.  79. 

"Vel  si  nulla  est  sapientia, 
cur  multitudo  sapientum  in 
Scrip tura  memoratur?" 

Ibid. 

" — ut  hisce  verbis  testatur 
filius  Sirach:  'Effudit  illam  in 
omnia  opera  sua  cum  omni 
came,  secundum  donationem 
suam,  et  praebuit  illam 
diligentibus  se.'  " 


THE   CANON   OF  THE   IV.  CENTURY 


375 


Dan.  XIV.  4. 

**Qui  respondens,  ait  ei:  Quia 
non  colo  idola  manufacta,  sed 
viventem  Deum,  qui  creavit 
caelum,  et  terrain,  et  habet  po- 
testatem  omnis  camis." 

Dan.  XIII.  45. 

"Cumque  duceretur  ad  mor- 
tem, suscitavit  Dominus  spir- 
itum  sanctum  pueri  junioris, 
cujus  nomen  Daniel — ." 

Baruch  III.  i. 

"Et  nunc,  Domine  omnipo- 
tens,  Deus  Israel,  anima  in  an- 
gustiis,  et  spiritus  anxius  cla- 
mat  ad  te." 

Dan.  III.  86. 

"Benedicite  spiritus,  et  an- 
imae  justorum.  Domino;  lau- 
date  et  superexaltate  eum  in 
saecula." 

Baruch  III.  10,  12. 

"Quid  est,  Israel,  quod  in 
terra  inimicorum  es?  Dereli- 
quisti  fontem  sapientiae." 


Idem  Contra  Arianos,  Orat. 
III.  30. 

"Item  Daniel  Astyagi  dixit: 
'Ego  idola  manufacta  non  colo, 
sed  Deum  viventem  qui  coelum 
et  terram  creavit,  et  in  omnem 
camem  dominatum  habet.'  " 

S.  Athanas.  Epist.  I.  ad  Sera- 
pionem,  5. 

"Et  apud  Danielem:  'Susci- 
tavit Deus  Spiritum  pueri  jimi- 
oris  cujus  nomen  Daniel,  et  ex- 
clamavit  voce  magna:  Mundus 
ego  sum  a  sanguine  hujus.'  " 

Ibid.  7.  ^ 

"Baruch  item  his  verbis  pre- 
catur:  'Anima  in  angustiis  et 
spiritus  anxius  clamat  ad  te,'  et 
in  Hymno  trium  Puerorum.  'Be- 
nedicte  spiritus  et  animae  justo- 
rum Domino.'  " 


Ibid.  19. 

"Et  iterum  apud  Baruch: 
'Quid  est  Israel,  quod  in  terra 
inimicorum  es  ?  dereliquisti  fon- 
tem sapientiae.'  " 


Sap.  I.  5. 

"Spiritus  enim  sanctus  dis- 
ciplinse  effugiet  fictum,  et  au- 
feret  se  a  cogitationibus,  quae 
sunt  sine  intellectu." 

Sap.  XII.  I. 

"O  quam  bonus  et  suavis  est, 
Domine,  spiritus  tuus  in  omni- 
bus!" 


Ibid.  26. 

"  'Spiritus  sanctus,'  in  quit, 
'disciplinae  fugiet  dolum,  et  au- 
feret  se  a  cogitationibus  quae 
sunt  sine  intellectu.'  " 

Ibid.  25. 

" — iterum  in  Sapientia  legi- 
tur:  'Tuus  enim  incorruptus 
spiritus  est  in  omnibus." 


376 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   IV.  CENTURY 


Dan.  III.  57. 

"Benedicite  omnia  opera  Do- 
mini Domino,"  etc. 

Sap.  I.  7. 

"Quoniam  spiritus  Domini 
replevit  orbem  terramm,"  etc. 

Dan.  XIV.  4. 

"Qui  respondens,  ait  ei:  'Quia 
non  colo  idola  manufacta,  sed 
viventem  Deum,  qui  creavit 
coelum,  et  terram  et  habet  po- 
test at  em  omnis  camis." 

Eccli.  I.  32. 

" — exsecratio  autem  pecca- 
tori,  cultura  Dei." 

Dan.  XIII.  42. 

"Exclamavit  autem  voce 
magna  Susanna,  et  dixit:  *Deus 
aeteme,  qui  absconditorum  es 
cognitor,  qui  nosti  omnia  ante- 
quam  fiant.'  " 

Baruch  III.  36-38. 

"Hie  est  Deus  noster,  et  non 
aestimabitur  alius  adversus 
eum.  Hie  adinvenit  omnem 
viam  disciplinae,  et  tradidit 
illam  Jacob  puero  suo,  et  Israel 
dilecto  suo.  Post  haec  in  terris 
visus  est,  et  cum  hominibus 
conversatus  est." 


Sap.  II.  24. 

"Invidia  autem  diaboli 
mors  introivit  in  orbem  terra- 
rum— ." 


Idem,  Epist.  II.  ad  Scrap.  6. 
"Benedicite  omnia  opera  Do- 
mini Domino." 

Idem,  Epist.  III. ad  Scrap.  4. 

"Ita  enim  scriptum  est:  Spi- 
ritus Domini  replevit  orbem 
terrarum.'  " 

Idem,  Epist.  IV.adSerap.  21. 

"Ita  quoque  Daniel  libere 
Dariumaffatusest:  'Non  vene- 
ror  idola  manufacta,  sed  viven- 
tem Deum  qui  creavit  coelum 
et  terram,  et  habet  potestatem 
omnis  camis.'  " 

S.  Ath.  Vita  S.  Antonii,  28. 

" — nam  'exsecratio  peccatori 
est  pietas  erga  Deum." 

Ibid.  31. 

" — solusque  Deus  novit  om- 
nia antequam  fiant." 


St.  Athan.  De  Incarnat.  et 
contra  Arianos   (In  fine). 

" — quemadmodum  et  Jere- 
mias  dicit:  *Hic  est  Deus  noster, 
et  non  aestimabitur  alius  adver- 
sus eum.  Hie  adinvenit  om- 
nem viam  scientiae,  et  tradidit 
illam  Jacob  puero  suo  et  Israel 
dilecto  suo.  Post  haec  in  terris 
visus  est  et  cum  hominibus  con- 
versatus est.'  " 

St.  Athanas.  Contra  Apollina- 
rium.  Lib.  I.  7. 

"Invidia  autem  diaboli  mors 
intra vit  in  mundum." 

Ibid.  15. 

Repetit  idem. 


THE   CANON    OF    THE   IV.  CENTURY 


377 


Dan.  III.  57-62; 


Baruch  III.  12. 

(Already  quoted.) 


St.  Ath.  De  Trinitate  et  S. 
Spiritu,  2. 

"Tres  quoque  sancti  marty- 
res,  Ananias,  Azarias,  et  Misael, 
in  fomace  ignis  positi  in  terra 
Chaldaeonim,  cum  admirabili- 
ter  Deus  calorem  ignis  ad  tem- 
peratum  refrigerium  convertis- 
set,  universam  creaturam  ad- 
hortantes  secum  laudare  Deum 
sic  incipiunt:  'Benedicite,'  "etc. 
Citat  majorem  partem  Cantici 
Trium  Puerorum. 

Ibid.  19. 

(Already  quoted.) 


Baruch  III.  12,  13. 

"Derelinquisti  fontem  sap- 
ientiae;  nam  si  in  via  Dei  am- 
bulasses,  habit  asses  utique 
in  pace  sempitema." 

Sap.  V.  3. 

" — dicentes  intra  se,  poeni- 
tentiam  agentes,  et  prae  an- 
gustia  spiritus  gementes:  Hi 
sunt  quos  habuimus  aliquando 
in  derisum,  et  in  similitudi- 
nem  improperii." 

Eccli.  XXXVIII.  9. 

"Fili,  in  tua  infirmitate  ne 
despicias  te  ipsum,  sed  ora  Do- 
minum,  et  ipse  curabit  te." 


EccH.  XV.  9. 

(Already  quoted.) 
Dan.  III.  50. 

(Already  quoted.) 


Ibid.  20. 

— ''dicit:  'DereUquisti  fon- 
tem sapientiae;  viam  Domini  si 
fuisses  ingressus,  utique  habi- 
tares  in  pace  in  aetemum  tem- 
pus." 

St.    Ath.    Sermo    Major    De 

Fide,  28. 
"Hie  est  quern  habuimus  ali- 
quando in  derisionem — ." 


St.  Ath.  Fragment  De  Amu- 

letis. 
*' — coelesti  sapientiae  obse- 
quens  dicenti:  'Fili,  in  tempore 
infirmitatis  tuae  ne  despicias, 
sed  ora  Dominum,  et  ipse  cura- 
bit te." 

Idem,  Epist.  VII.  4. 

(Already  quoted.) 
Idem,  Epist.  X.  3. 
(Already  quoted.) 


378 


THE   CANON   OF  THE   IV.  CENTURY 


Sap.  VII.  27. 

"Et  cum  sit  una,  omnia  po- 
test: et  in  se  permanens  omnia 
innovat,  et  per  nationes  in  ani- 
mas  sanctas  se  transfert,  ami- 
cos  Dei  et  prophetas  consti- 
tuit." 

Sap.  II.  12. 

**Circumveniamus  ergo  jus- 
tum,  quoniam  inutilis  est 
nobis,"  etc. 

Eccli.  XXVII.  29. 
"Et  qui  foveam  fodit,  inci- 
det  in  eam,"  etc. 

Sap.  II.  12. 

(Already  quoted.) 


Dan.  XII. 


Eccli.  XV.  9. 

(Already  quoted.) 

Baruch  II.  35. 

"Et  statuam  illis  testamen- 
tum  alteram  sempitemum,  ut 
sim  illis  in  Deum,  et  ipsi  erunt 
mihi  in  populum,"  etc. 

Eccli.  II.  I. 

"Fili,  accedens  ad  servitu- 
tem  Dei,  sta  in  justitia,  et  ti- 
more,  et  praepara  animam  tuam 
ad  tentationem." 


Ibid.  4. 

" — prout  de  Sapientia  test- 
atur  Salomon  'quae  cum  una  sit, 
omnia  potest,  et  in  se  manens 
omnia  renovat,  et  cum  ad  sanc- 
tas animas  accedet,  tunc  Dei 
amatores  et  prophetas  efficit.'  " 

Idem.  Epist.  XL  5. 
"Circumveniamus      justum, 
quia  nobis  minime  placet." 


Ibidem. 

"Qui  foveam  proximo  suo 
fodit  in  eamdem  incidet." 

Idem,  Epist.  XIX. 
(Already  quoted.) 

Idem,  Epist.  ad  Marcellinum, 
9- 

"Spiritu  edoctus  quisque  ser- 
monem  administrat  ita  ut  .  .  . 
aliquando  historias  praescribant 
ut  Daniel  Susannae — ." 

Ibid.  29. 

(Already  quoted.) 

S.  Ath.  Expositio  in  Ps. 
LXXVII.  10. 

"Novam  Evangelii  tradi- 
tionem  dicit  atque  illud:  'Ecce 
dies  venit,  et  disponam  cum  eis 
testamentum  novum.'  " 

Idem,  in  Ps.  CXVII. 

" — juxta  illud:  "Accedis  ad 
serviendum  Domino,  prsepara 
animam  tuam  ad  tenta- 
tionem.' " 


THE   CANON   OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY 


379 


EccH.  XVIII.  6. 
"Cum  consummaverit  homo* 
tunc  incipiet,"  etc. 


Baruch  III.  38. 

'Tost  haec  in  terns  visus  est, 
et  cum  hominibus  conversatus 
est." 

Dan.  XIII.  20. 

"Ecce,  ostia  pomarii  clausa 
sunt,  et  nemo  nos  videt  et  nos  in 
concupiscentia  tui  sumus,"  etc. 


Idem,  Ps.  CXVIII.  60. 
Repetit  idem. 

Ibidem  96. 

— "juxta   illud:    'Cum    con- 
summatur  homo,  tunc  incipit." 


De  Titulis  Psalm- 
De    Ps.    LXXVII. 


St.  Ath. 
orum, 

137- 
"Et  in  terra  visus  est,  et  cum 
hominibus    conversatus   est.'' 
(Repetit  idem  in  Ps.  XCIII.) 

St.  Athan,  Fragmenta  in 
Math. 

"Eodem  quoque  modo  senes 
duo  cum  Susannae  dixissent: 
*Ecce  in  concupiscentia  tui  su- 
mus— .'  " 


Eccli.  XXIII.  22. 

"Anima  caHda  quasi  ignis 
ardens  non  extinguetur,  donee 
aUquid  glutiat." 

Dan.  XIII. 


EccH.  VI.  36. 

"Et  si  videris  sensatum,  evi- 
gila  ad  eum,  et  gradus  ostiorum 
ilHus  exterat  pes  tuus." 


Eccli.  XLIII.  7. 

"A  luna  signum    diei  festi," 


etc. 


Ibid. 

" — ^juxta  Sapientiae  verbum: 
'Anima  cahda  est  ut  ignis  ac- 
census.'  " 

Ibid. 

"Daniel  vero  lascivos  senes 
sycophantiae  causa  a  se  damna- 
tos  juxta  legem  Moysis  ultus 
est." 

Ibid.  De  Falsis  Prophetis. 

"Si  videris  sapientem  ali- 
quem,  ex  consilio  Sapientiae, 
mane  vigila  ad  ilium,  stationes 
port  arum  ejus  terat  pes  tuus, 
ut  ab  eo  ediscas  legis  umbras  et 
gratiarum  dona." 

Ibid.  De  Lunaticis. 
" — Sapientia    ita    loquente: 
*A  luna,  signum  diei  festi.'  " 


380  THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY 

Maccab.  Passim.  Expositio  in  Ps.  LXXVIII. 

''Carnes  sanctorum  tuorum 
hestiis  terrcB.  Quomodo  enim 
sancti  non  fuerunt  quorum  san- 
guis effusus  est  pro  legis  obser- 
vantia,  ex  quorum  erant  nu- 
mero  Maccabaei?" 

No  man  can  say  that  St.  Athanasius  simply  considered 
these  books  as  pious  productions,  somewhat  like  to  our  Imi- 
tation of  Christ.  Quoting  a  text  from  Judith,  as  we  have 
seen  above,  Contra  Arianos  II.  2>^,  he  explicitly  adds  ''ut 
testatur  Scriptural 

His  insertion  of  Pastor  and  the  Doctrina  Apostolorum 
among  the  books  of  the  second  canon  is  a  critical  error  of  his 
own,  and  not  warranted  by  the  usage  of  the  Church.  Canon- 
icity  and  divinity  were  not  in  the  mind  of  Athanasius  con- 
vertible terms.  There  had  been  no  official  promulgation  of  a 
canon,  and  hence  he  applied  the  term  to  the  list  of  books 
which  of  old  had  received  the  sanction  of  the  Synagogue. 
We  feel  warranted,  then,  in  saying  that  as  a  witness  of  tra- 
dition in  his  practical  use  of  Scripture  the  weight  of  Athana- 
sius' authority  is  with  us,  while,  in  his  capacity  of  critic,  he 
accords  to  the  deuterocanonical  books  in  general  a  venera- 
tion which  the  Church  never  gave  to  any  but  divine  books. 

We  omit  the  Synopsis  Scripturse,  formerly  falsely 
ascribed  to  Athanasius,  since  it  covers  the  same  ground  as 
the  testimony  already  quoted. 

Another  Father  whose  authority  is  invoked  against  us  is 
St.  Cyril  of  Jerusalem.* 

*St.  Cyril  of  Jerusalem  was  bom  about  the  year  315  A.  D.  He  was 
ordained  deacon  by  St  Macarius  of  Jerusalem  and  priest  by  St  Maximus, 
whom  he  succeeded  in  the  see  of  Jerusalem  in  the  year  350  A.  D.  His 
episcopate  was  troubled  by  the  opposition  of  the  Arians,  then  powerful  in 
the  East.  He  was  often  exiled  by  the  intrigues  of  these,  and  was  marked 
for  death  by  Julian  the  Apostate;  but  the  death  of  Julian  prevented  the 
execution  of  his  project.  Cyril  died  in  his  see  in  386.  In  one  of  his  letters 
to  Constans  he  testifies  of  a  marvelous  luminous  apparition  of  a  cross 
which  extended  from  Mt.  Calvary  to  Mt.  Olivet  which  was  witnessed  by 
many  for  several  hotirs.  His  chief  works  are  his  Catecheses  to  the  Cate- 
chumens and  Neophytes.  Although  some  of  Cyril 's  opinions  are  strange, 
he  was  a  staunch  defender  of  the  faith,  and  he  merits  to  be  considered 
a  coryphaeus  in  patristic  theology. 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY  381 

The  testimony  upon  which  his  authority  is  invoked 
against  us  is  foiind  in  his  fourth Cathechesis,  Chapters  33,35, 
and  36.     The  following  excerpts  will  illustrate  his  position: 

''Studiously  also  learn  fro7n  the  Church  what  are  the  books 
of  the  Old  Testament,  and  what  of  the  New.  Read  to  me 
nothing  of  the  Apocrypha.  For  thou,  who  art  ignorant  of 
those  books  which  are  recognized  and  received  by  all,  why 
dost  thou  wretchedly  lose  thy  labor  about  those  which  are 
doubtful  and  controverted?  Read  the  divine  Scriptures, 
the  twenty-two  books  of  the  Old  Testament,  which  the 
seventy-two  interpreters  translated  .  .  .  Read  these 
twenty-two  hooks,  and  have  naught  to  do  with  the  Apocrypha. 
These  alone  studiously  meditate  and  handle,  which  we  also 
read  in  the  Church  with  certain  confidence.  Much  more 
prudent  and  more  pious  were  the  Apostles  and  the  ancient 
bishops,  the  rectors  of  the  Church,  who  handed  them  down. 
Thou,  therefore,  being  a  child  of  the  Church,  overstep  not  the 
established  laws."  Continuing,  he  gives  the  same  canon  as 
that  of  Athanasius,  except  that  he  conjoins  Ruth  with 
Judges,  and  includes  Esther,  thus  preserving  the  number 
twenty-two.  And  he  adds:  "But  let  all  the  other  (books) 
he  held  outside  (the  canon)  in  a  second  (inferior  order) .  And 
whatever  are  not  read  in  the  churches,  do  thou  not  read  these 
even  privately." 

In  truthfully  weighing  this  testimony,  we  find  in  the  first 
sentence  the  adoption  of  our  criterion  of  inspiration:  ''Studi- 
ously also  learn  from  the  Church  what  are  the  books  of  the  Old 
Testament,  and  what  of  the  New.''  In  the  enunciation  of  this 
eternal  verity,  Cyril  spoke  in  the  name  of  the  whole  Church. 
It  was  always  believed,  and  always  will  be  believed  by  those 
of  the  faith  of  Christ,  that  it  was  the  province  of  the  Church 
to  regulate  the  code  of  Scripture.  This  every  Father  be- 
lieved and  taught.  Neither  does  Cyril  characterize  as  apo- 
cryphal the  deuterocanonical  books.  He  considered  them 
doubtful  and  of  an  inferior  rank,  and  hence,  exhorts  the 
catechumens  to  make  use  of  those  concerning  which  there 
was  no  doubt.  In  forbidding  the  converts  to  read  privately 
the  books  which  were  not  read  in  the  Church,  he  tacitly 
allows  such  private  reading  of  the  deuterocanonical  books. 


382  THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY 

The  spirit  of  the  Church  at  Jerusalem  was  extremely  con- 
servative, tinged  with  Judaism.  Naturally  for  such  the 
books  which  the  Synagogue  did  not  recognize  would  be  re- 
garded with  some  disfavor.  Cyril  was  influenced  by  the 
trend  of  religious  thought  reigning  at  Jerusalem.  He  sacri- 
ficed nothing  by  his  strict  views  on  the  canon.  The  pro- 
tocanonical  books  are  the  most  useful ;  the  Church  had  not 
defined  the  Canon ;  and  Cyril  safeguarded  the  rights  of  the 
Church  by  bidding  everyone  go  to  her  for  the  Canon.  The 
protocanonical  and  deuterocanonical  books  were  not  made 
absolutely  equal  imtil  the  decree  of  the  Council  of  Trent. 
The  Fathers  considered  the  latter  as  useful,  edifying,  and 
most  of  the  Fathers  considered  them  of  divine  origin,  but 
they,  in  general,  accorded  them  a  less  dignity  and  venera- 
tion than  that  given  the  protocanonical  books.  The  slight 
doubt  that  reigned  in  some  churches  regarding  their  divine 
origin  induced  Cyril  to  place  them  in  an  inferior  rank.  In 
the  uncertainty  of  religious  thought  of  his  time,  he  judged 
it  better  that  the  neophytes  should  devote  their  study  to 
the  absolutely  certain  sources  of  divine  truth.  Were  C3nril 
alive  to-day,  he  would  learn  from  the  Church  to  receive  the 
complete  Canon. 

In  his  practical  use  of  Scripture,  Cyril  follows  the  usage 
of  the  Church,  and  often  quotes  the  deuterocanonical  books, 
as  the  following  examples  will  show  • 

Dan.  III.  27,  29.  Catech.  II.  XVI. 

** — quia  Justus  es  in  omnibus  " — illicque  pro  malorum  re- 
quae  fecisti  nobis,  et  universa  medio  dicebant:  'Justus  es,  Do- 
opera  tua  vera,  et  viae  tuae  rec-  mine,  in  omnibus  quae  fecisti 
tae,  et  omnia  judicia  tua  vera,  nobis:  peccavimus  enim  et 
Peccavimus,  et  inique  egimus,"  inique  egimus.'  " 
etc. 

Eccli.  III.  22.  Catech.  VI.  4. 

**Altiora  te  ne  quaesieris,  et  "Profundiora  tenequaesieris, 

fortiora  te  ne  scnitatus  fueris:  et  fortiora  te  ne  in  vestiges:  quae 

sed  quae  praecepit  tibi  Deus,  ilia  tibi  praecepta  sunt,  ea  mente 

cogita  semper,  et  in  pluribus  agita." 
operibus  ejus  ne  fueris  curio- 
sus." 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   IV.    CENTURY 


383 


Sap.  XIII.  2. 

** — sed  aut  ignem,  aut  spiri- 
tum,  aut  citatum  aerem,  aut 
gyrum  stellarum,  aut  nimiam 
aquam,  aut  solem  et  lunam, 
rectores  orbis  terrarum  deos 
putaverunt." 

Sap.  XIII.  5. 

" — a  magnitudine  enim  spe- 
cie! et  creaturae,  cognoscibiliter 
poterit  creator  horum  videri."- 


Eccli.  XLIII.  2. 

**Sol  in  aspectu  annuntians 
in  exitu,  vas  admirabile  opus 
excelsi." 


Ibid.  8. 

"Deum  nonnulli  ignem  esse 
senserunt." 


Sap.  XIII.  5. 

" — magnitudine  enim  spe- 
ciei  et  creaturae,  cognoscibiliter 
poterit  Creator  horum  videri." 


Baruch  III.  36-38. 

"Hie  est  Deus  noster,  et  non 
aestimabitur  alius  adversus 
eum.  Hie  adinvenit  omnem 
viam  disciplinae,  et  tradidit 
illam  Jacob  puero  suo,  et  Israel 
dilecto  suo.  Post  haec  in  terris 
visus  est,  et  cum  hominibus 
conversatus  est." 


Catech.  IX.  2. 

"juxta  Salomonem  qui  ait: 
'nam  ex  magnitudine  et  pul- 
chritudine  creaturarum,  pro- 
portione  servata,  Procreator 
earum  conspicitur. '  " 

Ibid.  6. 

" — ^nonne  admirari  oportet 
eum  qui  in  solis  fabricam  in- 
spexerit  ?  nam  modici  vasis  ap- 
parens  vim  ingentem  complect- 
itur;  ab  oriente  apparens  et  in 
occidentem  usque  lumen  emit- 
tens." 

Ibid.  16. 

** — et  ex  his  quae  dicta  lec- 
taque  sunt,  quaeque  ipse  re- 
perire  aut  cogitare  poteris,  ex 
magnitudine  et  pulchritudine 
creaturarum,  proportione  ser- 
vata, Auctorem  earum  con- 
spicias." 

Catech.  XL  15. 

** — audi  Prophetam  dicen- 
tem:  *Hic  est  Deus  noster,  non 
reputabitur  alius  adversus  eum. 
Invenit  omnem  viam  scientiae, 
et  dedit  eam  Jacob  puero  suo, 
et  Israel  dilecto  a  se.  Post 
haec  in  terra  visus  est,  et  cum 
hominibus  conversatus  est." 


384 


THE    CANON   OF   THE   IV.  CENTURY 


Eccli.  II.  22. 

(Already  quoted.) 


Sap.  II.  24. 

"Invidia  autem  diaboli  mors 
introivit  in  orbem  terrarum — ." 

Eccli.  IV.  36. 

"Non  sit  porrecta  manus  tua 
ad  accipiendum,  et  ad  dandum 
collecta." 

Dan.  XIV.  35. 

"Et  apprehendit  eum  Ange- 
las Domini  in  vertice  ejus,  et 
portavit  eum  capillo  capitis 
sui." 

Sap.  VI.  17. 

"Quoniam  dignos  se  ipsa  cir- 
cuit quaerens,  et  in  viis  ostendit 
se  illis  hilariter,  et  in  omni  pro- 
videntia  occurrit  illis." 

Dan.  XIII.  42-45. 

"Exclamavit  autem  voce 
magna  Susanna,  et  dixit:  Deus 
aeteme,  qui  absconditorum  es 
cognitor,  qui  nosti  omnia,  ante- 
quam  fiant,  tu  scis,  quoniam 
falsum  testimonium  tulerunt 
contra  me,  et  ecce,  morior,  cum 
nihil  horum  fecerim,  quae  isti 
malitiose  composuerunt  adver- 
sum  me.  Exaudivit  autem  Do- 
minus  vocem  ejus.  Cumque 
duceretur  ad  mortem,  suscita- 
vit  Dominus  spiritum  sanctum 
pueri  junioris,  cujus  nomen 
Daniel—  " 


Ibid.  19. 

**Ne  extoUas  te  ipsum,  ne  ca- 
das.  Quae  tibi  mandata  sunt  ea 
sola  meditare." 

Catech.  XII.  5. 

"At  maximum  hoc  opificio- 
rum  Dei  in  paradiso  choros  ag- 
ens  inde  diaboli  ejecit  invidiam 

Catech.  XIII.  8.    ^ 

"Nee  enim  ad  accipiendum 
tantum  porrecta,  verum  etiam 
ad  operandum  prompta  tibi  sit 
manus." 

Catech.  XIV.  25. 

"Si  enim  Habacuc  ab  angelo 
translatus  est,  per  comam  sui 
capitis  portatus,"  etc. 

Catech.  XVI.  19. 

" — tantum  illi  ostia  aperia- 
mus ;  circumit  enim  qucsrens  dig- 
nos.'' 

Ibid.  31. 

"Idem  (Spiritus  Sanctus)  sa- 
pientem  effecit  Danielis  ani- 
mam  ut  seniorum  judex  esset 
adolescens.  Damnata  fuerat 
casta  Susanna  tamquam  impu- 
dica;  vindex  nullus;  quis  enim 
eam  a  principibus  eripuisset? 
Ad  mortem  ducebatur,  in  man- 
ibus  lictorum  jam  erat.  .  .  scrip- 
turn  est  enim:  'Suscitavit  Deus 
Spiritum  sanctum  in  puero 
juvenculo.*  " 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY  385 

Catech.     XXIII.     Mystago- 
Eccli.  XXXIV.  9.  gia,  V.  17. 

"Qui  non  est  tentatus,  quid         ** — et  quomodo  alicubi  dic- 
scit.?"  turn  est:  *Vir  non  tentatus,  non 

est  probatus.'  " 

We  must  admit  that  Cyril's  use  of  deuterocanonical 
Scripture  is  more  restricted  than  that  of  other  writers,  but  it 
is  sufficient  to  show  how  the  general  belief  and  usage  of  the 
Church  overcame  the  critical  views  of  the  individual.  The 
force  of  such  general  acceptance  of  the  Church  may  easily  be 
judged  from  this  alone,  that  in  the  very  catecheses  in 
which  he  recommends  to  the  catechumens  the  use  of  only 
the  protocanonical  books,  he  himself  employs  the  deutero- 
canonical books  as  divine  Scripture. 

There  is  also  alleged  against  us  the  authority  of 
Epiphanius.* 

The  passage  upon  which  his  opposition  to  the  deutero- 
canonical works  is  founded,  occurs  in  the  fourth  chapter  of 
the  treatise  on  Weights  and  Measures.  In  this  chapter  he 
endeavors  to  make  the  number  of  canonical  books  of  the 
Old  Testament  accord  with  the  twenty-two  letters  of  the  He- 
brew alphabet.  Of  course,  he  only  enumerates  the  books  of 
the  Jewish  Canon.     The  closing  words  of  the  chapter  are: 

*St.  Epiphanius  was  bom  in  Palestine,  about  the  year  310  A.  D.  His 
youth  was  spent  in  the  life  of  a  solitary  in  the  desert.  He  founded  at  the 
age  of  twenty  a  monastery  in  the  desert,  and  devoted  himself  to  the  study 
of  sacred  and  profane  writers.  The  result  of  his  continued  application  to 
reading  is  apparent  in  his  works.  In  366  he  was  made  Bishop  of  Salamina 
the  metropolis  of  Cyprus.  In  the  capacity  of  bishop,  he  was  a  sturdy  bul- 
wark against  the  teeming  heresies  of  that  age.  He  bitterly  opposed  the 
theories  of  Origen,  and,  in  his  zeal  to  anathematize  him,  was  discourteous 
to  John  Chrysostom.  His  imprudent  zeal  often  led  him  to  encroach  on  the 
jurisdiction  of  other  bishops.  He  died  on  a  return  voyage  by  sea  from 
Constantinople  to  Cyprus  in  403.  The  works  of  Epiphanius  exhibit  a  vast 
erudition,  marred  by  a  lack  of  criticism  and  by  the  insertion  of  many 
fables.  He  was  a  compiler  more  than  an  original  thinker.  His  style  is 
harsh,  negligent,  obscure  and  often  without  logical  sequence.  He  lacked 
the  power  and  discerning  mind  to  master  and  order  the  vast  amount  that 
he  had  read.  His  chief  works  are  his  Panarium  or  Treatise  against  the 
Heresies,  the  Anchorage,  the  Treatise  of  the  Weights  and  Measures  of  the 
Jews,  and  a  treatise  concerning  the  twelve  precious  stones  of  the  rational 
of  the  High  Priest  of  the  Jews. 

(25)  H.S. 


386  THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY 

"Regarding  the  two  books  that  are  written  in  verse,  that  is, 
the  Wisdom  of  Solomon,  which  is  called  Panaretus,  and  the 
book  of  Jesus  the  Son  of  Sirach,  the  grandson  of  Jesus,  who 
wrote  this  book  of  Wisdom  in  Hebrew,  which  his  grandson 
Jesus  translated  into  Greek,  although  they  are  useful  and 
profitable,  they  are  by  no  means  placed  in  the  Canon  of 
Scripture.  Hence,  they  were  not  placed  in  the  Ark  of  the 
testament."  The  obscurity  and  lack  of  critical  acumen  of 
the  writer  appear  in  this  short  extract.  It  is  evident  that 
he  supposes  that  the  divine  books  of  the  Jews  were  placed 
in  the  Ark  of  the  covenant,  whereas  only  the  Decalogue 
was  therein  placed.  The  term  canonical  with  Epiphanius, 
signified  the  official  approbation  by  the  Synagogue.  Being 
a  native  of  Palestine,  his  mind  was  in  a  measure  tinged  by 
Judaizing  theories.  In  his  day,  the  deuterocanonical  books 
were  not  officially  canonized  by  any  universal  authority. 
They  had  the  sanction  of  usage  and  the  veneration  of  the 
Church,  but  this  did  not  make  them  equal  in  extrinsic  author- 
ity to  the  books  that  Jew  and  Christian  had  always  con- 
sidered divine.  Although  Epiphanius  speaks  only  of  Wis- 
dom and  Ecclesiasticus  his  words  equally  apply  to  the  other 
deuterocanonical  books,  since  their  history  has  always  been 
the  same.  The  reason  that  Tobias,  Judith  and  Maccabees 
receive  no  recognition  from  Cyril  and  Epiphanius  is  most 
probably  that  they  are  not  so  useful  to  impart  dogmatic 
truths.  Comely  and  others  think  that  Epiphanius,  in  giv- 
ing in  this  place  the  restricted  Jewish  Canon,  tacitly  infers 
the  existence  of  an  enlarged  Christian  Canon.  We  fail  to 
find  this  opinion  credible.  Everything  seems  to  demon- 
strate that  the  canonization  spoken  of  in  those  days  was 
simply  the  official  sanction  of  the  Synagogue.  This  was  the 
one  and  only  Canon  that  these  Fathers  recognized,  but  in 
excluding  the  other  books  from  it  they  did  not  deny  them 
divinity,  although  many  accorded  them  an  inferior  dignity. 
All  the  books  were  read ;  all  were  venerated  by  the  faithful ; 
but  the  books  of  the  first  Canon  had  the  external  sanction  of 
the  Synagogue,  which  raised  them  theoretically  above  the 
others.  It  was  only  in  the  Council  of  Trent,  that  the  official 
declaration  of  the  Church  made  the  two  classes  perfectly 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY  387 

equal.  Now,  such  official  declaration  being  wanting,  it  is 
not  strange  that  these  Fathers,  theoretically  treating  the 
question  should  not  place  these  books  in  the  Canon.  Neither 
is  it  strange  that  individuals  should  have  doubted  concern- 
ing the  divinity  of  these  books.  It  shows  the  need  of  the 
Magisterium  of  the  Church,  which  entered  at  the  appropri- 
ate time,  and  took  away  all  doubt  by  her  authoritative  voice. 

That  Epiphanius,  at  least,  considered  Wisdom  and  Ec- 
clesiasticus  as  divine  Scripture  appears  from  the  following 
passage  from  Ad  versus  Haereses,  Haeres.  LXXVI.  5  :  "For 
if  thou  wert  begotten  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  taught  by  the 
Apostles  and  Prophets,  this  shouldst  thou  do :  Examine  all 
the  sacred  codices  from  Genesis  to  the  times  of  Esther,  which 
are  twenty-seven  books  of  the  Old  Testament,  and  are  enu- 
merated as  twenty-two ;  then  the  four  Holy  Gospels.  .  .  the 
Books  of  Wisdom,  that  of  Solomon,  and  of  the  Son  of  Strach, 
and  in  fine  all  the  books  of  Scripture."  Hence,  Epiphanius, 
as  it  were,  made  two  classes  of  the  Old  Testament  Scrip- 
tures ;  the  books  canonized  by  the  Jews,  and  those  adopted 
and  used  by  the  Church  as  Holy  Writ.  In  favor  of  the 
former  was  the  authority  of  the  Synagogue ;  while  all  used 
and  venerated  the  latter,  as,  individuals,  they  did  not  feel 
warranted  in  according  them  a  prerogative  that  the  Church 
had  not  yet  given. 

Epiphanius'  use  of  the  deuterocanonical  books  will  ap- 
pear from  the  following  passages: 

Ad  versus   Haereses,    Lib.    I. 
Eccli.  VII.  I.  Haeres.  XXIV.  6. 

"Noli  facere  mala,  et  non  te  "-quemadmodum  Scriptura 

apprehendent."  testatur:     'Qui  quaenint  mala, 

mala  eos  apprehendent.'  " 
Sap.  III.  14.  Ibid.  Haeres.  XXVI.  15. 

" — et  spado,  qui  non  opera-  "Ad  haec  alio  in  loco  Spiritus 

tus  est  per  manus  suas  iniqui-     Sanctus  .  .  .  hoc  modo  vaticina- 
tatem  "  etc.  ^^^  ^^^*  'Beata  sterilis  incoin- 

quinata,  quae  nescivit  torum  in 
delicto,  et  spado,  qui  non  oper- 
atus  est  manibus  suis  iniquita- 
tem.'  " 


388 


THE   CANON   OF  THE   IV.  CENTURY 


Maccab.  I.  i 


Dan.  XIII.  42. 

"Exclamavit  autem  voce 
magna  Susanna,  et  dixit:  Dens 
aeteme,  qui  absconditorum  es 
cognitor,  qui  nosti  omnia  ante- 
quam  fiant — ." 

Eccli.  XIII.  20. 

"Omnis  caro  ad  similem  sibi 
conjungetur,  et  omnis  homo  si- 
mili  sui  sociabitur." 

Eccli.  XLIII.  26. 

"Qui  navigant  mare,  enar- 
rent  pericula  ejus ;  et  audientes 
auribus  nostris  admirabimur. " 


Eccli.  XIV.  5. 

"Qui  sibi  nequam  est,  cui  alii 
bonus  erit?" 


Sap.  VII.  2. 

"Decem  mensium  tempore 
coagulatus  sum  in  sanguine," 
etc. 

Baruch  III.  36-38. 

"Hie  est  Deus  noster,  et  non 
aestimabitur  alius  adversus  eum. 
Hie  adinvenit  omnem  viam  dis- 
ciplinae  et  tradidit  illam  Jacob 
puero  suo  et  Israel  dilecto  suo. 


Ibid.  Haeres.  XXX.  25. 

"Quae  causa  est  cur  in  Mac- 
cabaeorum  libris  scriptum  sit: 
* — e  Cittiensium  terra  genus 
quodam  esse  propagatum.'  " 

Ibid.  31. 

"Novit  enim  omnia  Deus  an- 
tequam  fiant,  'ut  est  Scrip- 
turn:  " 


Ibid.  Haeres.  XXXII.  8. 

"Quoniam  avis  omnis  secun- 
dum genus  suum  congregatur, 
et  omnis  homo  simili  sui  sociab- 
itur 'ait  Scriptura:  " 

Ibid.  Haeres.  XLII.  9. 

" —  ut  haec  in  nobis  vera  sit 
Scripturae  sententia :  *  Qui  navi- 
gant mare,virtutes  Domini  nar- 
rant."  ' 

Ibid.  Haeres.  XLII.  Refut. 
70. 

"Quis  seipsum  in  praeceps 
impellit,  impletque  quod  scrip- 
tum est:  'Qui  sibi  nequam  est, 
cui  bonus  erit.'"  " 

Ibid.  Lib.  II.  Hares.  II.  29. 

"In  quo  ad  Salomonis  dic- 
tum illud  allusisse  videntur: 
'Decem  mensium  spatio  con- 
cretus  in  sanguine." 

Ibid.  Hseres.  LVII.  2. 

" —  ut  Scriptura  declarat: 
'Hie  est  Deus  tuus:  non  reputa- 
bitur  aHus  ad  ipsum.  Invenit 
omnem  viam  scientiae  et  dedit 
illam  Jacob  puero  suo,  et  Israel 


THE   CANON   OF   THE    IV.   CENTURY 


389 


Post  haec  in  terris  visus  est,  et  dilecto  suo.  Post  haec  in  terra 
cum  hominibus  conversatus  visus  est,  et  cum  hominibus 
est."  conversatus  est.'  " 


Baruch  III.  36. 

(Already  quoted.) 


Ibid.  9. 

"Scriptum  est,  in  quit:  'Iste 
Deus  est  noster,  et  non  aestima- 
bitur  alius.'  " 


Eccli.  XX.  2. 

"Concupiscentia  spadonis  de- 
virginabit  juvenculam — ." 


Eccli.  XXVII  2. 

"Sicut  in  medio  compaginis 
lapidum  palus  figitur  sic  et  in- 
ter medium  venditionis  et 
emptionis  angustiabitur  pecca- 
tum." 

Sap.  I.  13. 

"Quoniam  Deus  mortem  non 
fecit,  nee  laetatur  in  perditione 
vivorum." 


Ibid.  Hceres.  LVIII.  4. 

** — a  Sapiente  dicitur:  'Con- 
cupiscentia  spadonis  devirgina- 
bit  juvenculam." 

Ibid.  H«res.  LIX.  7. 

"Atque  'ut  palus,'  inquit,  in- 
ter duos  lapides  conteritur,  sic 
peccatum  in  medio  ejus  qui 
emit  et  vendit.'  " 

Ibid.  Haeres.  LXIV.  19. 

"Deus  enim  mortem  non  fe- 
cit, nee  delectatur  in  perditione 
viventium.  Invidia  vero  dia- 
boli  mors  introivit  in  mundum, 
ut  per  Salomonem  Sapientia 
testatur.'' 


Sap.  I.  14. 

"Creavit  enim,  ut  essent  om- 
nia: et  sanabiles  fecit  nationes 
orbis  terrarum:  et  non  est  in 
illis  medicamentum  exterminii, 
nee  inf erorum  regnum  in  terra. ' ' 

Sap.  II.  23. 

"Quoniam  Deus  creavit  ho- 
minem  inexterminabilem,  et  ad 
imaginem  similitudinis  suae  fe- 
cit ilium." 


Ibid.  Haeres.  LXIV.  31. 

* ' — id  quod  Sapientia  confirm- 
at  his  verbis:  'Creavit  enim 
ut  essent  omnia  Deus;  et  salu- 
tares  sunt  mundi  generationes. 
Nee  est  in  illis  medicamentum 
exitii.'  " 

Ibid.  34. 

"Creavit  enim,  ait  Sapientia, 
hominem  in  incorruptione ;  ad 
imaginem  aetemitatis  suas  fecit 
ilium." 


390 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   IV.  CENTURY 


Sap.  III.  1-4. 

"Justorum  autem  animas  in 
manu  Dei  sunt,  et  non  tanget 
illos  tormentum  mortis.  Visi 
sunt  oculis  insipientium  mori: 
et  aestimata  est  afflictio  exitus 
illorum:  et  quod  a  nobis  est  iter, 
exterminium :  illi  autem  sunt 
in  pace.  Et  si  coram  hominibus 
tormenta  passi  sunt,  spes  illo- 
rum immortalitate  plena  est." 


Sap.  VII.  2. 

" — decem  mensium  tempore 
coagulatus  sum  in  sanguine,  ex 
semine  hominis,  et  delecta- 
mento  somni  conveniente." 

Eccli.  X.  13. 

"Cum  enim  morietur  homo, 
haereditabit  serpentes,  et  bes- 
tias,  et  vermes." 


Sap.  III.  4-6. 

"Et  si  coram  hominibus  tor- 
menta passi  sunt,  spes  illorum 
immortalitate  plena  est.  In 
paucis  vexati,  in  multis  bene 
disponentur:  quoniam  Deus 
tentavit  eos,  et  invenit  illos 
dignos  se.  Tamquam  aurum  in 
fomace  probavit  illos,  et  quasi 
holocausti  hostiam  accepit  illos, 
et  in  tempore  erit  respectus  il- 
lorum." 


Ibid.  36. 

"Idem  vero  per  Salomonem 
in  eo  libro  qui  Sapientia  inscri- 
bitur  ostendit  ubi:  'Justorum,' 
in  quit,  'animae  in  manu  Dei 
sunt,  et  non  tanget  illos  tor- 
mentum. Visi  sunt  oculis  insi- 
pientum  mori,  et  aestimata  est 
affiictio  exitus  illorum,  et  quod 
a  nobis  est  iter,  exterminium. 
Illi  autem  sunt  in  pace,  et  spes 
illorum  immortalitate  plena 
est.'  " 

Ibid.  39. 

" — Christi  corpus  non  ex  vol- 
untate  viri,  ac  voluptate  som- 
nique  congressione  in  iniquit- 
atibus  esse  susceptum." 

Ibid. 

'  *  Quam  ob  causam  sapiens  ille 
Sirach  ita  pronuntiat:  'Cum 
enim  morietur  homo,  haeredit- 
abit serpentes,  et  bestias,  et 
vermes.'  " 

Ibid.  48. 

"Quam  vero  consentanea  iis 
de  martyribus  a  Salomone  pro- 
nuntiata  sint,  attendite.  Neque 
enim  aliarum  Scripturarum  testi- 
monio  caremus.  'Deus,'  inquit, 
'tentavit  eos,  et  invenit  eos  dig- 
nosse.  Tamquam  aurum  in  f  or- 
nace  probavit  illos;  et  sicut  ho- 
locaustum  suavitatis  accepit 
illos;  et  in  tempore  visitationis 
illorum,'  etc.  Cum  an  tea  dixis- 
set:  'Et  si  coram  hominibus 
tormenta  passi  sunt,  spes  illo- 
rum immortalitate  plena  est. 
In  paucis  correpti  magna  bene- 
ficia  consequentur.'  " 


THE    CANON   OF   THE   IV.  CENTURY 


391 


Sap.  I.  4. 

** — q-uoniam  in  malevolam 
animam  non  introibit  sapientia, 
nee  habitabit  in  eorpore  sub- 
dito  peceatis." 

Sap.  IV.  12. 

"Faseinatio  enim  nugaeitatis 
obseurat  bona,  et  ineonstantia 
eoneupiseentiag  transvertit  sen- 
sum  sine  malitia." 


Sap.  IV.  8-12. 

"Senectus   enim   venerabilis 
est  non  diutuma  etc." 


Ibid.  54. 

"Praeterea  Salomon:  'In  ma- 
levolam,' inquit,  'animam  non 
introibit  sapientia,  nee  habita- 
bit in  eorpore  obnoxio  pec- 
cato.'  " 

Ibid.  H^res.  LXV.  i. 

"Nam  in  illo  ScripturcB  dic- 
tum illud  impletur:  'Fascinatio 
enim  nugaeitatis  obseurat  bo- 
na, et  ineonstantia  concupi- 
scentiae  transvertit  mentem 
sine  malitia." 

Ibid.  Haeres.  LXVII.  4. 

"Hie  igitur:  'Senectus,'  in- 
quit,    'venerabilis   non   longae- 


Sap.  IV.  13,  14. 

"Consummatus  in  brevi,  ex- 
plevit  tempora  mult  a,  placita 
enim  erat  Deo  anima  illius: 
propter  hoc  properavit  educere 
ilium  de  medio  iniquitatum; 
populi  autem  videntes,  et  non 
intelligentes,  nee  ponentes  in 
praecordiis  talia. — " 

Baruch  III.  36. 

"Hie  est  Deus  noster,  et  non 
aestimabitur  alius  adversus 
eum." 

Ibid.  37. 

"Hie  adinvenit  omnem  viam 
disciplinae,  et  tradidit  illam  Ja- 
cob puero  suo,  et  Israel  dilecto 
suo." 

Ibid.  38. 

"Post  haec  in  terris  visus  est, 
et  cum  hominibus  conversatus 
est." 


Ibid. 

"Ut  autem  de  pueris  loqui 
ilium  appareat  statim  adjicit: 
'Consummatus  in  brevi  (quasi 
dicat:  mortuus  juvenis)  imple- 
vit  tempora  multa.  Placita  e- 
nim  erat  Domino  anima  illius: 
propterea  festinavit  eum  edu- 
cere de  medio  malitiae." 

Ibid.  Hffires.  LXIX.  31. 
"Alter     eum    ipso     minime 
comparabitur. " 

Ibid. 

"Quid  porro?  Ut  de  Filio  ser- 
monem  esse  cognoscas,  dein- 
ceps  ista  subjecit:  'Invenit  om- 
nem viam  scientiae  et  dedit 
illam.'  " 

Ibid. 

"Tum  postea:  'In  terra  visus 
est,  et  cum  hominibus  conver- 
satus est.'  " 


392 


THE   CANON   OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY 


Ibid.  37,  38. 
Ibid.  38. 


Esther  XIII.  9. 

" — et  dixit:  Domine,  Do- 
mine,  rex  omnipotens,  in  di- 
tione  enim  tua  cuncta  sunt  pos- 
ita,  et  non  est,  qui  possit  tuae 
resistere  voluntati,  si  decreveris 
salvare  Israel." 


Baruch  III.  37,  38. 


Sap.  I.  7. 

''Quoniam  spiritus  Domini 
replevit  orbem  terrarum:  et 
hoc,  quod  continet  omnia,  sci- 
entiam  habet  vocis." 


Eccli.  XIV.  5. 

"Qui  sibi  nequam  est,  cui  alii 
bonus  erit  ?  et  non  jucundabitur 
in  bonis  suis." 


Sap.  IX.  14. 

"Cogitationes  enim  morta- 
lium  timidae,  et  incertae  provi- 
dentiae  nostras — ." 


Ibid.  53. 
Ibid.  55. 

Ibid.  Lib.  III.  Haeres.  LXX. 
7- 

**Sed  et  illud  proinde  certum, 
posse  ilium  quae  velit  efficere: 
'Nullus  est  enim  qui  ejus  volun- 
tati resistat.'  " 


Ibid.  Haeres.  LXXI.  3. 

* '  Qui  in venit  omnem  viam  sci- 
entiae.  Exstitisse  vero  divina 
Scrip tura  non  dubitat.  Nam 
quae  sequuntur  ante  ilium  ex- 
stitisse declarant.  Velut  quod 
omnem  viam  scientiae  reper- 
isse  dicatur,  deinde  in  terris 
visus  esse." 

Ibid.  Haeres.  LXXIV. 
"Spiritus   enim   Domini   re- 
plevit orbem  terrarum." 


Ibid.  Haeres.  LXXVI.  Con- 
fut.     VIII. 

"Ecquis  igitur  illius  misere- 
bitur,  qui  sibi  ipsi  malus,  nem- 
ini  alteri  bonus  est?" 

Ibid.  LXXVI.  Confut. 
XXXI. 

'* — siquidem  divina  majes- 
tas,  Patris  inquam  et  Filii  et 
Spiritus  Sancti,  angelorum 
mentes  omnes  longo  intervallo 
superat,  nedum  kominum  quo- 
rum timidcB  cogitationes.'' 


THE    CANON   OF   THE   IV.  CENTURY 


393 


Baruch,  III.  38. 

"Post  haec  in  terris  visus  est, 
et  cum  hominibus  conversatus 
est." 


St.  Epiph.  Expositio  Fidei 
XVI. 

" —  ac  denique  verus  ut  ap- 
pareret  Filius,  et  illud  Propheta 
vaticinium  expleret:  *Et  post 
haec  enim  in  terra  visus  est,  et 
cum  hominibus  conversatus 
est.  " 

The  frequency  with  which  this  passage  is  quoted  by  the 
Fathers  manifests  that  they  considered  it  a  classic  text  to 
prove  the  Incarnation. 


Sap.  XIV.  20. 

"Initium  enim  fomicationis 
est  exquisitio  idolorum — ." 

Eccli.  III.  22. 

"Altiora  te  ne  quaesieris,  et 
fortiora  te  ne  scrutatus  fueris: 
sed  quae  praecepit  tibi  Deus,  ilia 
cogita  semper,  et  in  pluribus 
operibus  ejus  ne  fueris  curio- 
sus." 

Dan.  III.  57. 

"Benedicite  omnia  opera  Do- 
mini Domino — ." 


He  repeats  this  passage 
Canticle  in  the  twenty-fourth 

Sap  X.  21 

" — quoniam  sapientia  aper- 
uit  OS  mutorum,  et  linguas  in- 
fantium  fecit  disertas." 

Sap.  VIII.  2 

"Hanc  amavi,  et  exquisivi  a 
juventute  mea,  et  quaesivi  spon- 


St.  Epiph.  Ancoratus  II. 

"  'Initium  quippe  fomica- 
tionis est  exquisitio  idolorum,' 
ut  ait  Scriptura. ' ' 

Ibid.  XII. 

"Etenim  cum  nos  Scriptura 
reprehendit  his  verbis:  'Quae 
prascepta  tibi  sunt,  haec  cogita; 
neque  arcanis  et  occultis  tibi 
opus  est:  et  altiora  te  ne  quae- 
sieris, ac  profundiora  te  ne  in- 
quiras.'  " 

Ibid.  XXIV. 

" — et  creaturas  a  Creatore 
discernentes,  hunc  in  modum 
(tres  pueri  in  fomace)  locuti 
sunt:  'Benedicite  omnia  opera 
Domini  Domino.'  " 

and   other  portions    of   the 
and  twenty-fifth  Chapters. 

Ibid.  XXXI. 

** — quique    balbutientium 
linguam    disertam    praestitit," 
etc. 

Ibid.  XLII. 

"Ad  haec  Salomon  aliam 
quamdam  sapientiam  appellat: 


394 


THE    CANON   OF   THE   IV.    CENTURY 


sam  mihi  earn  assumere,  et 
amator  factus  sum  formae  il- 
lius." 

Banich  III.  38. 

"Post  hsec  in  terns  visus  est, 
et  cum  hominibus  conversatus 
est." 


Esther  XIII.  9. 

(Already  quoted.) 


Sap.  II.  23. 

"Quoniam  Deus  creavit  ho- 
minem  inexterminabilem,  et  ad 
imaginem  similitudinis  suae  fe- 
cit ilium." 


'Amavi,'  in  quit,  'pulchritudi- 
nem  ejus  et  eam  mihi  sponsam 
duxi.'  " 

Ibid.  LXXVIII. 

"Christus  autem  Deus  e 
coelo,  verbum  e  Maria  caro  fac- 
tum est  hominemque  suscepit, 
et  nobiscum,  ut  ait  Scriptura, 
versatus  est." 

Ibid.  XCVI. 

(Already  quoted.) 

St.  Epiph.  Epist.  ad  Joan. 
Episcopum  Hieros.  Cap. 
VI. 

"Dicit  enim  (Salomon)  in  Sa- 
pientia  quae  titulo  ejus  inscribi- 
tur:  'Creavit  Deus  incorrup- 
tum  hominem,  et  imaginem 
suae  proprietatis  dedit  ei.'  " 


Here,  in  the  clearest  terms,  Epiphanius  makes  known 
that  his  exclusion  of  a  book  from  the  list  of  those  called  ca- 
nonical, was  not  equivalent  to  denying  it  the  authority  of 
divine  Scripture.  He  certainly  believed  that  he  was  quot- 
ing the  revealed  word,  when  he  introduces  these  passages  in 
the  solemn  formulae,  **ut  ait  Scriptura,"  "Scriptum  est,"  etc. 
Neither  did  he  quote  these  passages  at  random,  not  advert- 
ing to  the  fact  that  they  were  not  in  the  Canon.  He  often 
specifies  the  hook,  and  speaks  of  the  authors.  We  believe  that 
had  the  other  deuterocanonical  books  been  equally  service- 
able for  dogmatic  argument,  he  would  have  drawn  also  from 
them  as  from  Scriptural  sources.  At  least,  our  adversaries 
must  admit  that  Epiphanius  is  a  staunch  supporter  of  the 
divinity  of  at  least  three  deuterocanonical  books,  and  also 
of  the  deuterocanonical  fragments  of  Daniel,  and  that  his 
exclusion  of  the  deuterocanonical  books  from  the  list  then 
termed  canonical,  cannot  be  construed  to  signify  non- 
inspiration  of  the  same. 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY  395 

Among  the  adversaries  of  the  deuterocanonical  books  is 
placed  Gregory  Nazian^enus.* 

Two  passages  in  Gregory's  works  form  the  basis  of  his 
pretended  opposition  to  the  deuterocanonical  books.  The 
first  passage  occurs  in  Carmen  I.  13 : 

"Accipe  a  me  selectum  hunc,  amice,  numenim, 

Sunt  quidem  historici  libri  omnes  duodecim, 

Antiquioris  Hebraicae  sapientiae: 

Primus  Genesis,  deinde  Exodus  et  Leviticus ; 

Postea  Numeri,  tum  Deuteronomium, 

Deinde  Josue  et  Judices :  Ruth  octavus  est, 

Nonus  decimusque  liber,  res  gestae  Regum, 

Et  Paralipomena ;  Esdram  habes  ultimo  loco. 

Quinque  versibus  scripti  stmt,  quorum  primus  Job, 

Postea  David,  tum  Salomonis  tres, 

Ecclesiastes,  Canticum,  et  Proverbia. 

Similiter  quinque  Spiritus  prophetici; 

Ac  uno  quidem  continentur  libri  duodecim : 

Osee,  et  Amos,  et  Micheas  tertius; 

Deinde  Joel,  postea  Jonas,  Abdias, 

Nahum,  Habacuc  et  Sophonias, 

Aggaeus,  deinde  Zacharias,  Malachias, 

Uno  hi  continentur  libro:  secundo  Isaias, 

Tertio  qui  vocatus  est  Jeremias  ab  infantia, 

Quarto  Ezechiel,  quinto  Danielis  gratia. 

Veteres  quidem  numeravi  duos  et  viginti  libros 

Hebraeorum  elementorum  numero  respondentes," 

♦Gregory  Nazianzenus,  takes  his  distinctive  title  from  Nazianzus,  a 
small  town  in  the  south-west  of  Cappadocia,  which  is  not  known  to  the 
early  geographers,  and  owes  its  chief  importance  to  its  connection  with  our 
author.  It  is  impossible  to  fix  with  exactness  the  date  of  his  birth ;  accord- 
ing to  the  BoUandists  it  should  be  placed  before  the  year  300.  His  father, 
at  first  an  infidel,  was  converted  by  his  wife  Nonna,  and  afterwards  was 
Bishop  of  Nazianzus;  his  mother  St.  Nonna,  considered  the  infant  Gregory 
as  given  her  in  answer  to  her  prayers. 

Gregory  studied  at  Caesarea,  Alexandria  and  Athens,  and  became  pro- 
ficient in  Greek  oratory  and  poetry.  He  contracted  in  youth  a  friend- 
ship for  St.  Basil  which  lasted  through  life.  The  two  soiight  together  the 
solitude  of  the  desert,  whence  Gregory  was  afterwards  stmimoned  to  assist 
his  aged  father  in  the  cares  of  the  Episcopate.  He  was  soon  after  or- 
ordained  priest  by  his  father,  and  then  bishop,  by  St.  Basil.  Gregory, 
however,  soon  after  abandoned  his  see  for  the  solitude,  but  emerged  thence 
again  at  the  instance  of  his  decrepit  father,  and  executed  the  episcopal 
functions  in  Nazianzus  without  assuming  the  name  of  bishop.  After  the 
death  of  his  parent,  he  again  sought  the  desert,  but  was  brought  thence 
by  his  friends,  and  placed  in  the  see  of  Constantinople.  He  was  favored 
by  Theodosius  the  Great,  and  resisted  the  swarming  heresies  of  the  time, 
chief  among  which  was  the  heresy  of  Arius. 


396  THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY 

After  enumerating  in  succession  all  the  books  of  the  New 
Testament,  excepting  the  Apocalypse,  he  concludes : 

"Si  quid  est  extra  hunc  numerum  non  est  ex  germanis  Scrip- 
turis." 

In  the  celebrated  Carmen  ad  Seleucum,  a  Canon  occurs 
differing  from  the  foregoing  only  in  this,  that  he  admits  in  it 
Esther,  which  did  not  appear  in  the  first  Carmen,  and  also 
the  Apocalypse  with  the  qualification : 

"Apocalypsim  autem  Johannis 
Quidam  vero  admittunt,  pars  vero  major 
Spuriam  asserunt." 

Basing  their  judgment  on  this  difference  in  the  Canons, 
and  on  the  testimony  of  some  codices,  some  have  denied  to 
Gregory  the  authorship  of  the  Carmen  ad  Seleucum,  and 
have  attributed  it  to  Amphilochius,  Bishop  of  Iconium 
(344 — 394),  the  friend  of  Gregory,  called  by  him  the  "irre- 
proachable pontiff,"  the  * 'angel,"  and  "hero  of  truth."  The 
opinion  rests  principally  on  the  authority  of  Combefis,  the 
editor  of  Amphilochius'  works,  and  in  my  judgment  has 
little  foimdation.  I  see  no  good  reason  for  denying  to 
Gregory  this  Carmen,  since  the  presence  of  Esther  and  the 
Apocalypse  therein  would  simply  show  that  Gregory,  in 
endeavoring  to  follow  the  trend  of  religious  thought,  could 
not  be  consistent  in  excluding  books  which  the  Church  con- 
sidered divine. 

Gregory  concludes  his  canon  in  the  Carmen  ad  Seleucum 
with  these  words: 

— "His  certissimus 
Canon  tibi  sit  divinanim  Scripturarum." 

It  would  seem,  at  first  sight,  that  these  testimonies  mani- 
fest a  certain  opposition  to  the  deuterocanonical  books. 
However,  in  the  Carmen  ad  Seleucum,  252-257,  Gregory 

The  perfidy  and  envy  of  his  enemies  induced  him  to  resign  again  the 
see  of  Constantinople,  and  he  finally  sought  the  solitude  of  the  desert 
again,  where  he  died  in  389  A.  D. 

Gregory  was  by  nature  severe  and  inclined  to  the  life  of  an  ascetic.  His 
vast  erudition  caused  Jerome  to  journey  to  Constantinople  to  hear  him. 
His  writings  are  at  times  excessively  ornate,  and  sometimes  uncritical. 
His  chief  works  are  fifty-five  orations,  a  great  number  of  letters,  and  many 
poems. 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY  397 

declares  that  he  allows  to  the  deuterocanonical  books  a  sort 
of  middle  place  between  uninspired  and  inspired  Scripture : 

"Non  omnis  liber  pro  certo  habendus 
Qui  venerandum  Scripttirae  nomen  praefert. 

Sunt  enim,  sunt  (ut  nonnunquam  fit)  inscripti  falsi  nominis 

Libri  :  nonnulli  quidem  intermedii  sunt  ac  vicini, 

Ut  ita  dixerim,  veritatis  doctrince  ; 
Alii  vero  spurii  et  magnopere  periculosi." 

Gregory  accorded  to  the  deuterocanonical  books  a  middle 
rank.  He  made  a  distinction  much  like  that  made  of  old  by 
the  Jews  in  assigning  an  inferior  degree  of  inspiration  to  the 
products  of  the  'Tilia  vocis."  This  was  an  erroneous  ex- 
planation of  a  fact.  The  fact  was  that  these  books  bore 
the  name  of  divine  Scripture ;  they  entered  into  the  deposit 
of  faith  of  the  Church ;  the  faithful  learned  them  by  memory ; 
Gregory  himself,  as  we  shall  see  by  numerous  passages  from 
his  writings,  had  drunk  deeply  from  these  fountains. 

On  the  other  hand,  they  were  not  in  the  official  list  of  the 
Synagogue.  This  alone  was  sufficient  to  cast  such  doubt 
upon  them  with  the  extremely  conservative  Cappadocian 
school,  of  which  Gregory  is  a  representative  exponent,  that 
they  stopped  short  of  inserting  them  in  the  Canon;  at  the 
same  time  they  honored  them  as  sources  of  divine  truth. 

The  other  Cappadocian  Fathers,  Basil,  Gregory  of  Nyssa 
and  Caesarius,  frequently  cite  Wisdom  and  Ecclesiasticus,  as 
they  are  the  books  most  fitted  for  dogmatic  argument. 

Basil  quotes  Judith: 

Lib.  De  Spiritu  Sancto  VIII. 
Judith  IX.  4.  19. 

"Tu  enim  fecisti  priora,  et  ilia  "Sicuti    Judith:    'Cogitasti,' 

post  ilia  cogitasti,  et  hoc  fac-  inquit,  'et  praesto  fuerunt  om- 
tum  est  quod  ipse  voluisti."  nia  quae  cogitasti.'  " 

Epist.  VI.  ad  Nectarii  uxo- 
II.  Maccab.  VII.  i.  rem,  i. 

"Contigit  autem  et  septem  "Maccabaeorum  mater  sep- 

fratres  una  cum  matre  sua  ap-  tem  filionim  mortem  conspexit, 
prehensos  compelli  a  rege  edere  nee  ingemuit,  nee  ignobiles  lac- 
contra  fas  cames  porcinas,  fla-  rymas  effudit,  sed  gratias  ag- 
gris,  et  taureis  cruciatos."  ens  Deo  quod  videret  eos  igne 

et  ferro  et  acerbissimis  verberi- 
bus  e  vinculis  camis  exsolvi, 


398 


THE   CANON   OF   THE  IV.  CENTURY 


Deo  quidem  probata  fuit,  Cele- 
bris vero  habita  est  apud  hom- 
ines." 

How  deeply  Gregory  had  been  influenced  by  the  practical 
usage  of  the  Church  can  be  learned  from  the  following 
collated  passages : 


Dan.  XIII.  5. 

"Et  constituti  sunt  de  popu- 
lo  duo  senes  judices  in  illo  anno: 
de  quibus  locutus  est  Dominus : 
Quia  egressa  est  iniquitas  de 
Baby  lone,  a  senioribus  judici- 
bus,  qui  videbantur  regere 
populum." 

Eccli.  III.  II. 

"Benedictio  patris  firmat  do- 
mos  filiorum — ." 

Sap.  V.  15. 

" — quoniam  spes  impii  tam- 
quam  lanugo  est,  quae  a  vento 
toUitur,"  etc. 

Sap.  XVI.  13. 

"Tu  es  enim,  Domine,  qui 
vitae  et  mortis  habes  potesta- 
tem,  et  deducis  ad  portas  mor- 
tis, et  reducis. — " 

Eccli.  XXXVIII.  16. 

"Fili,  in  mortuum  produc 
lacrymas,  et  quasi  dira  passus, 
incipe  plorare,"  etc. 

Sap.  III.  15. 

"Bonorum  enim  laborum 
gloriosus  est  fructus,"  etc. 

Sap.  V.  10,  II. 

" — et  tamquam  navis,  quae 
pertransit  fluctuantem  aquam: 
cujus,  cum  praeterierit,  non  est 
vestigium  in  venire,  neque  semi- 
tam  carinas  illius  in  fluctibus: 


.  St.  Greg.  Naz.  Orat.  II.  64. 

" — ^nempe  quod  egressa  est 
iniquitas  ex  Babylone  a  seniori- 
bus judicibus  qui  populum  re- 
gere videbantur." 


Ibid.  gb. 

"Benedictio  enim  Patris  fir- 
mat  domos  filiorum." 

Orat.  V.  28. 

" — tamquam  lanugo  quae  a 
vento  disjicitur — ." 

Ibid.  29. 

"Ecquis  novit  num  Deus  qui 
solvit  compeditos,  gravemque 
et  'humis  vergentem  a  portis 
mortis  in  altum  subvehit — .'  " 

Orat.  VII.  I. 

"Super  mortuum  plora,  et 
quasi  dira  passus,  incipe  plor- 
are." 

Ibid.  14. 

"Bonorum  enim  laborum 
gloriosus  est  fructus." 

Ibid.  19. 

"Insomnium  sumus,  minime 
consistens,  spectrum  quoddam, 
quod  teneri  non  potest,  avis 
praetereuntis  volatus,  navis  in 
mari    vestigium    non    habens. 


THE   CANON   OF   THE  IV.  CENTURY 


399 


pulvis,  vapor,  ros  matutinus, 
flos  momento  nascens  et  mo- 
mento  marcescens." 


Orat.  IX.  2. 

"In  malignam  enim  animam 
non  ingressuram  sapientiam 
recte  dictum  est." 


Orat.  XI.  I. 

"Amico  fideli  nulla  est  com- 
paratio ;  nee  ulla  est  digna  pon- 
deratio  contra  bonitatem  illius. 
Amicus  fidelis,  protectio  for- 
tis." 


aut  tamquam  avis,  quae  trans- 
volat  in  aere,  cujus  nullum  in- 
venitur  argumentum  itineris," 
etc. 

Sap.  I.  4. 

" — quoniam  in  malevolam 
animam  non  introibit  sapien- 
tia,  nee  habitabit  in  corpore 
subdito  peccatis." 

Eccli.  VI.  14,  15. 

"Amicus  fidelis,  protectio 
fortis:  qtii  autem  invenit  ilium, 
invenit  thesaurum.  Amico 
fideli  nulla  est  comparatio,  et 
non  est  digna  ponderatio  auri 
et  argenti  contra  bonitatem 
fidei  illius." 

Eccli.  I.  2.  Orat.  XIV.  30. 

"Arenam   maris,    et   pluvise         "Sed  quis  arenam  maris  et 
guttas,  et  dies  saeculi  quis  dinu-     pluviae   guttas   et   abyssi   pro- 
meravit?  Altitudinem  coeli,  et     funditatem  metiri  .  ,  .  queat?" 
latitudinem   terrae,   et   profun- 
dum  abyssi  quis  dimensus  est  ?" 

The  fifteenth  oration  of  St.  Gregory  is  in  praise  of  the 
Maccabees,  whose  feast  the  Church  celebrated  in  his  day. 
Frequently  in  the  course  of  the  oration  he  adverts  to  data 
taken  from  the  first  and  second  Books  of  Maccabees.  The 
very  fact  that  he  composed  such  an  oration  shows  clearly 
that  he  recognized  the  books.  Comely 's  animadversion 
here  that  Gregory  has  in  mind  only  the  fourth  book,  is  erron- 
eous. [Comely,  Introduc.  Gen.  p.  98,  note  18.]  Gregory 
in  the  second  paragraph  speaks  of  a  book,  qui  rationem  per- 
turbattonibus  animi  imperare  docet,  which  evidently  refers  to 
the  apocryphal  fourth  book  of  Maccabees,  but  this  would 
only  show  that  he  united  the  fourth  with  the  others  in  col- 
lecting his  argument.  Most  of  the  data  of  the  oration  are 
taken  from  the  first  and  second  Books  of  Maccabees. 


400 


THE   CANON   OF  THE   IV.  CENTURY 


Eccli.  XL  30. 

"Ante  mortem  ne  laudes  ho- 
minem  quemquam,  quoniam  in 
filiis  suis  agnoscitur  vir." 

Baruch  11.  12. 

** — peccavimus,  impie  egi- 
mtis,  inique  gessimus,  Domine 
Deus  noster,  in  omnibus  jus- 
titiis  tuis." 

Dan.  XIV.  33. 

"Dixitque  angelus  Domini 
ad  Habacuc:  Per  prandium, 
quod  habes,  in  Babylonem 
Danieli,  qui  est  in  lacu  leo- 
num." 

Sap.  XL  21. 

"Sed  et  sine  his  uno  spiritu 
poterant  occidi  persecutionem 
passi  ab  ipsis  factis  suis.  et  dis- 
persi  per  spiritum  virtutis  tuae : 
sed  omnia  in  mensura,  et  nu- 
mero  et  pondere  disposuisti." 

Dan.  XIIL 


Sap.  L  7. 

"Quoniam  spiritus  Domini 
replevit  orbem  terrarum,  et 
hoc,  quod  continet  omnia, 
scientiam  habet  vocis." 


Orat.  XVI.  3. 

"Nam  si,  ut  ego  cum  Salo- 
mone  sentio,  hominem  ante 
mortem  beatum  praedicare  non 
oportet." 

Ibid.  12. 

" — adjungam:  Peccavimus, 
inique  egimus,  impie  tat  em  feci- 
mus." 

Orat.  XVIII.  30. 

' ' — aut  per  prophetam  in  sub- 
lime raptum  satians,  ut  Daniel- 
em,  an  tea  cum  fame  in  lacu 
premeretur." 

Orat.  XXIV.  i. 

" — atque  ut  hinc  initium  du- 
camus,  quam  commode,  pul- 
chrisque  Dei  mensuris,  qui  om- 
nia cum  pondere  et  mensura 
constituit  ac  moderatur,"  etc. 

Ibid.  10. 

"(Deus)  qui  et  Susannam 
mortis  periculo  libera vit,  et 
Theclam  servavit ;  illam  a  saevis 
senioribus,  hanc  a  tyranno 
ipsius  proco  et  a  matri  adhuc 
crudeliori." 

Orat.  XXVIII.  8. 

" — ait  Scriptura  .  .  .  'Spiri- 
tus Domini  replevit  orbem  ter- 
rarum.' " 


Orat.  XXIX.  17.  He  calls  the  Son  of  God  "Imago 
bonitatis,"  evidently  assuming  the  phrase  from  Wisdom, 
VII.  26. 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   IV.  CENTURY 


401 


Baruch  III.  36-38. 

"Hie  est  Deus  noster,  et  non 
aestimabitur  alius  adversus  eum. 

Post  haee  in  terns  visus  est, 
et  cum  hominibus  conversatus 
est." 


Orat.  XXX.  13. 

"  *Hic  Deus  tuus,  et  non 
aestimabitur  alius  praeter  eum. ' 
Et  paucis  interjectis:  Tost  haec 
in  terra  visus  est,  et  cum  hom- 
inibus conversatus  est.'  " 


Sap.  VII.  22. 

"Est  enim  in  ilia  spiritus  in- 
telligentias,  sanctus,  unicus, 
multiplex,  subtilis,  disertus, 
mobilis,"  etc. 

Sap.  I.  4. 

"Quoniam  in  malevolam  ani- 
mam  non  introibit  sapientia, 
nee  habitabit  in  corpore  sub- 
dito  peccatis." 

Sap.  III.  II. 

"Sapientiam  enim,  et  disci- 
plinam  qui  abjicit,  infelix  est: 
et  vacua  est  spes  illorum,  et  la- 
bores  sine  fructu,  et  inutilia 
opera  eorum." 

Eccli.  V.  14. 

"Si  est  tibi  intellectus,  re- 
sponde  proximo:  sin  autem, 
sit  manus  tua  super  os  tuum, 
ne  capiaris  in  verbo  indisci- 
plinato,  et  conftmdaris. " 

Eccli.  VII.  15. 
"Noli  verbosus  esse  in  multi- 
tudine  presbyterorum." 

Eccli.  XI.  27. 

"In  die  bonorum  ne  imme- 
mor  sis  malorum,  et  in  die  mal- 
orum  ne  immemor  sis  bono- 
rum.—" 


Orat.  XXXI.  29. 

"Spiritus  intelligens,  multi- 
plex, apertus,  clarus,  incon- 
taminatus,  minimeque  imped- 
itus,"  etc. 

Orat.  XXXII.  12. 

" — quoniam  in  malevolam 
animam  non  introibit  sapien- 
tia." 


Ibid.  20. 

" — ac  Deus  faxit  ne  quid  un- 
quam'  huic  occupationi  prasver- 
tendum  ducam,  ne  alioqui  ab 
ipsa  Sapientia  miser  appeller, 
ut  sapientiam  et  eruditionem 
spemens  ac  pro  nihilo  ducens." 

Ibid.  21. 

"Si  est  tibi  sermo  prudentiae, 
inquit  ille,  nee  quisquam  prohi- 
bebit:  sin  minus,  haereat  vincu- 
lum labiis  tuis." 

Ibid. 

"Noli  celer  esse  in  verbis,  ad- 
monet  Sapiens." 

Orat  XXXV.  3. 
"In  die  enim  laetitiae,  inquit, 
malorum     oblivio  est." 


(26)  H.  S. 


402 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   IV.  CENTURY 


es 


Dan.  XIII.  5. 

"Et  constituti  sunt  de  popu- 
lo  duo  senes  judices  in  illo 
anno,  de  quibus  locutus  est 
Dominus:  Quia  egressa  est  in- 
iquitas  de  Babylone  a  senior- 
ibus  judicibus,  qui  videbantur 
regere  populum." 

Dan.  XIII.  42. 

"Exclamavit     autem     voce 
magna  Susanna,  et  dixit:  Deus 
aeteme,  qui  absconditorum  e 
cognitor,  qui  nosti  omnia  ante 
quam  fiant." 

Eccli.  III.  II. 

"Benedictio  patris  firmat  do- 
mes filiorum:  maledictio  au- 
tem matris  eradicat  funda- 
menta." 

Eccli.  III.  12. 

"Ne  glorieris  in  contumelia 
patris,"  etc. 

Eccli.  I.  16. 

**Initium  sapientiae,  timor 
Domini,  et  cum  fidelibus  in 
vulva  concreatus  est,  cum  elec- 
tis  feminis  graditur,  et  cum 
justis  et  fidelibus  agnoscitur." 

Sap.  III.  7. 

"Fulgebunt  justi,  et  tam- 
quam  scintillas  in  arundineto 
discurrent." 

Eccli.  XXXII.  3. 

" — ut  lagteris  propter  illos,  et 
omamentum  gratiae  accipias 
coronam,  et  dignationem  con- 
sequaris  corrogationis , ' ' 


Orat.  XXXVI.  3. 

" — ^juxta  Danielem  egressa 
est  iniquitas  a  senioribus  Baby- 
lonicis,  qui  Israelem  revere  ex- 
istimabantur. " 


Ibid.  7.  . 

" — imo  non  videor,  sed  per- 
spicuus  atque  manifestus  sum 
ei  qui  omnia  priusquam  orian- 
tur  novit." 


Orat.  XXXVII.  6. 

"Item  alio  loco:  'Benedictio 
patris  firmat  domos  filiorum; 
maledictio  autem  matris  erad- 
icat fundamenta.'  " 

Ibid.  18. 

"Quod  si  hoc  etiam  probas: 
*Fili,  ne  glorieris  de  ignominia 
patris.'  " 

Orat.  XXXIX.  8. 

"Unde  Salomon  nobis  legem 
statuit:  'Principium  sapientiae,' 
inquit,  'posside  sapientiam.' 
Quidnam  vocat  hoc  principium 
sapientiae?  'Timorem.'  " 

Orat.  XL.  6. 

" — quo  tempore  nimirum 
justi  fulgebunt  sicut  sol." 

Ibid.  18. 

"Honore  eum  complectere  ut 
te  omet,  capitique  tuo  gratia- 
rum  coronam  nectat." 


THE    CANON   OF   THE   IV.    CENTURY 


403 


Sap.  IV.  8. 

"Senectus  enim  venerabilis 
est  non  diutuma,  neque  anno- 
rum  numero  computata:  cani 
autem  sunt  sensus  hominis." 

II.  Maccab.  VII.  i. 

"Contigit  autem  et  septem 
fratres  una  cum  matre  sua  ap- 
prehensos  compelli  a  rege  edere 
contra  fas  cames  porcinas,  fla- 
gris,  et  taureis  cruciatos." 

Sap.  II.  24. 

"Invidia  autem  diaboli  mors 
introivit,"  etc. 


Orat.  XLIII.  23. 

"Quis  prudentia  perinde  ca- 
nus  erat,  etiam  ante  canitiem? 
Quandoquidem  hac  re  senectu- 
tem  Salomon  quoque  defini- 
vit." 

Ibid.  74. 

"Mitto  septem  Maccabaeo- 
rum  dimicationem  qui  cum 
sacerdote  et  matre  in  sanguine 
atque  omnis  generis  tormentis 
consummati  sunt." 

Orat.  XLIV.  4. 

"Quoniam  autem  invidia 
diaboli     mors     in      mundum 


introivit,"  etc. 

The  reference  to  Judith  V.  6,  in  Orat.  XLV.  15:  ''quod 
et  semen  Chaldaicum  sublatum  atque  oppressum  Scriptura 
vocat,"  is  somewhat  uncertain. 

Eccli.  III.  II.  St.  Greg.  Epist.  LXI. 

"Benedictio  patris  firmat  do-  "Ita  fiet  ut  ab  ea  non  modo 

mos  filiorum :  maledictio  autem     pecunias  habeatis,  sed  mater- 


matris  eradicat  fundamenta. 


Baruch  III.  38. 

"Post  haec  in  terris  visus  est, 
et  cum  hominibus  conversatus 
est." 

Eccli.  IV.  32. 

"Noli  resistere  contra  faciem 
potentis,  nee  coneris  contra  ic- 
tum  fluvii." 

Ecclli.  XXXI.  32. 

"^qua  vita  hominibus  vi- 
num  in  sobrietate:  si  bibas 
illud  moderate,  eris  sobrius." 


nam  etiam  benediction  em,  fili- 
orum domos  fulcientem,  conse- 
quamini." 

Epist.  CII. 

" — atque  ad  hsec  verba  con- 
fugientes:  Tost  haec  in  terra 
visus  est,  et  cum  hominibus 
conversatus  est.'  " 

Epist.  CLXXVIII. 

"Porro  non  esse  vi  cohiben- 
dum  fluminis  cursum,  paroemia 
quoque  ipsa  docet." 

Epist.  CLXXXI. 

"Sin  autem  tibi  praestantiore 
monitore  opus  est,  illud  quidem 
monet  Salomon  ut  cum  consilio 
vinum  bibas,  ne  mundi  hujus 
temulentia  et  vertigine  agaris." 


404  THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY 

These  references  leave  no  doubt  that  Gregory  believed 
that  he  was  there  quoting  divine  Scripture.  The  whole 
Church  used  them,  committed  them  to  memory,  proved 
and  illustrated  their  dogmas  by  them.  This  influence  was 
so  powerful  that  even  the  most  conservative  came  under  it, 
and  as  we  shall  see,  even  those  who  wished  to  turn  the  tide  of 
this  tradition  were  inconsistent.  Another  Oriental  authority 
of  this  period  that  is  objected  against  us  is  the  sixtieth  canon 
of  the  Council  of  Laodicea.  This  canon  explicitly  defines 
that  the  books  to  be  read  in  the  Church  are  those  which  we 
now  comprehend  in  the  protocanonical  class.  The  date  of 
the  Council  of  Laodicea  is  uncertain,  but  it  is  generally  be- 
lieved to  have  been  celebrated  about  the  middle  of  the  fourth 
century.  Some  have  doubted  the  genuineness  of  the  sixtieth 
canon  [Herbst,  Vincenzi,  Malou,  Danko],  but  as  it  is  recog- 
nized by  Hefele,  Conciliengesch.  I.  p.  749-751,  we  shall  not 
base  our  treatment  of  it  upon  its  doubtful  character.  Ad- 
mitting all  its  claims,  it  simply  establishes  that  some  bishops 
of  Phrygia  in  a  particular  council  refused  to  allow  to  be  read 
publicly  in  the  Church  any  book  excepting  those  that  were 
absolutely  certain.  We  are  not  endeavoring  to  prove  that 
the  position  of  protocanonical  and  deuterocanonical  books 
were  equal  in  the  early  ages  of  the  Church.  Their  equality 
was  wrought  by  the  Council  of  Trent.  What  we  wish  to 
show  is  that  these  books  were  known  to  the  early  Christians, 
venerated  by  them,  committed  to  memory  by  them,  and 
considered  by  them  as  the  inspired  word  of  God. 

The  Council  in  Trullo,  which  the  Greeks  hold  to  be  ecu- 
menical, received  the  Canons  of  the  Council  of  Laodicea, 
but,  as  they  also  received  the  Canons  of  the  Council  of  Carth- 
age, they  evidently  intended  that  the  decree  concerning  the 
canonical  Scriptures  should  be  modified  in  accordance  with 
the  complete  Canon  of  the  Council  of  Carthage. 

The  Greeks  also  in  the  Council  in  Trullo  received  various 
Apocryphal  documents  of  the  fifth  century  called  the  Canons 
of  the  Apostles.  The  eighty-fifth  canon  of  this  collection  is 
sometimes  cited  against  us,  as  it  does  not  contain  any  of  the 
deuterocanonical  books,  save  the  books  of  Maccabees.  This 
canon  can  have  no  weight,  since  it  embraces  three  books  of 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY  405 

Maccabees,  two  epistles  of  St.  Clement  of  Rome,  and  the 
eight  books  of  the  Constitutiones  Apostolorum. 

The  Council  in  Trullo  in  receiving  this  Canon  could  not 
have  excluded  the  Canon  of  the  Council  of  Carthage,  whose 
decrees  and  canons  it  ratified.  In  fact,  the  Council  in  Trullo 
expressly  stated  that  the  Constitutiones  Apost.  were  adul- 
terated, and  hence  not  to  be  read.  It  seems,  however,  due 
to  this  canon  that  the  Greeks,  even  to  this  day,  recognize  as 
canonical  three  books  of  Maccabees. 

We  can  scarcely  expect  the  guiding  hand  of  the  Holy 
Ghost  in  the  members  who  composed  the  Council  in  Trullo. 

One  who  candidly  examines  the  data  here  presented 
must  admit  that  the  Oriental  Church  during  the  fourth  and 
fifth  centuries  recognized  and  used  the  deuterocanonical 
books  as  divine  Scripture. 

Turning  now  from  the  East  to  the  West,  we  meet  the  first 
objection  taken  from  the  writings  of  St.  Hilary.*  The 
objection  is  found  in  the  fifteenth  paragraph  of  his  Prologue 
on  the  Book  of  Psalms.  After  seeking  mystic  reasons  for  the 
number  eight  in  the  Scriptures,  he  proceeds  as  follows: 

''And  this  is  the  cause  that  the  law  of  the  Old  Testament 
is  divided  into  twenty-two  books,  that  they  might  agree  with 
the  number  of  letters.  These  books  are  arranged  according 
to  the  traditions  of  the  ancients,  so  that  five  are  of  Moses, 

*St.  Hilary  was  bom  in  Poitiers  in  France  in  the  opening  years  of  the 
fotirth  century.  His  parents  were  pagans  of  noble  rank.  They  procured 
for  their  son  every  educational  advantage,  and  the  youth,  applying  him- 
self with  diligence,  soon  came  to  be  regarded  as  the  most  learned  man  of 
his  age.  His  reading  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  brought  him  to  recognize  the 
truth  of  the  Christian  faith,  which  he,  his  wife,  and  child  Abra  embraced. 
He  was  consecrated  Bishop  of  Poitiers  in  350  or  355  and  became  the 
staunch  defender  of  the  Church  against  Arianism.  The  Arian  Satuminus  of 
Aries  banished  Hilary  to  Phrygia.  He  was  called  from  his  exile  to  be 
present  at  the  Council  of  Seleucia;  in  which  council  he  made  such  head 
against  the  Arians  that  to  rid  themselves  of  such  a  powerful  antagonist 
they  sent  him  back  to  France.  The  people  received  him  as  a  hero  from 
the  arena,  victorious  over  the  heretics.  He  set  in  order  his  diocese,  and 
there  passed  the  remaining  years  of  his  holy  life.  He  died  in  367  or  368. 
His  most  celebrated  work  is  his  Twelve  Books  on  the  Trinity,  composed 
during  his  exile  in  Phrygia.  This  treatise  is  a  classic  work  on  the  Trinity. 
He  has  left  also  Commentaries  on  the  Psalms  and  Gospels,  a  treatise  De 
Fide  Orientalium,  and  numerous  other  shorter  works. 


406  THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY 

the  sixth  is  of  Jesus  Nave,  the  seventh  is  Judges  and  Ruth, 
the  first  and  second  of  Kings  form  the  eighth ;  the  third  and 
fourth  (of  Kings)  form  the  ninth;  the  two  books  of  ParaHpo- 
menon  form  the  tenth ;  the  discourses  of  the  days  of  Ezra 
form  the  eleventh;  the  book  of  Psalms,  the  twelfth;  Solo- 
mon's proverbs,  Ecclesiastes,  and  the  Canticle  of  Canticles 
form  the  thirteenth,  fourteenth  and  fifteenth;  the  twelve 
Prophets  form  the  sixteenth ;  while  Isaiah,  then  Jeremiah, 
the  Lamentations  and  the  Epistle,  Daniel,  Ezechiel,  Job,  and 
Esther  complete  the  ntimber  of  twenty-two  books."  Hilary 
gives  only  the  protocanonical  works,  and  then  continues : 

"To  some  it  has  seemed  good  to  add  Tobias  and  Judith, 
and  thus  constitute  twenty-four  books  according  to  the 
Greek  alphabet,"  etc. 

We  see  here  an  excessive  mysticism  impelling  a  man  to 
reject  or  admit  a  book  for  the  sole  purpose  of  completing  a 
mystic  number.  This  tendency  had  been  brought  into 
patristic  thought  by  Origen  and  the  Alexandrian  school. 
Hilary  does  not  reject  the  deuterocanonical  books,  but  con- 
siders the  protocanonical  as  forming  a  class  by  themselves. 
Hilary's  weak,  unsubstantial  arguments  are  attributable  to 
the  man  impressed  by  the  spirit  of  his  age.  The  great  cur- 
rent of  tradition  w^as  greater  than  any  one  man,  and  drew 
Hilary  with  it,  so  that  we  find  him  ranking  the  deuterocan- 
onical books  on  an  equal  footing  with  the  others,  as  the  fol- 
lowing quotations  mil  show : 

Eccli.  I.  33.  St.  Hilary  Prol.  in  Ps.  20. 

"Fili,    concupiscens    sapien-  " — secundum  id   quod   dic- 

tiam,  conserva  justitiam,  et  turn  est:  'Desiderasti  sapien- 
Deus  praebebit  illam  tibi."  tiam?  Serva  man  data,  et  Dom- 

inus  praestabit  tibi  eandem.'  " 

Eccli.  XI.  30.  Tract,  in  XIV.  Ps.  14. 

"Ante  mortem  ne  laudes  ho-  'Tdcirco    apud    Salomonem 

minem  quemquam,  quoniam  in      omnis  laus  in  exitu  canitur." 
filiis  suis  agnoscitur  vir." 

Dan.  XIII.  56.  Tract,  in  LII.  Ps.  19. 

"Et,  amoto  eo,  jussit  venire  "Sed  et  Daniel  presbyteros 

alium,  et  dixit  ei:  Semen  Cha-  condemnans  ita  dicit:  'Non  se- 
naan,  et  non  Juda,"  etc.  men  Abraham,  sed  semen  Cha- 

♦  naan,  et  non  Juda.'  " 


THE   CANON   OF  THE   IV.   CENTURY 


407 


Eccli.  I.  1 6. 

"Initium  sapientiae,  timor 
Domini,"  etc. 

Baruch  III.  $8. 

"Post  haec  in  terris  visus  est, 
et  cum  hominibus  conversatus 
est." 

Sap.  XVII.  I. 

"Magna  sunt  enim  judicia 
tua,  Domine,  et  inenarrabilia," 
etc." 

Sap.  VII.  27. 

"Et  cum  sit  una,  omnia  po- 
test: et  in  se  permanens,  omnia 
innovat,  et  per  nationes  in  ani- 
mas  sanctas  se  transfert:  ami- 
cos  Dei  et  prophetas  con- 
stituit." 

Sap.  I.  7. 

"Quoniam  spiritus  Domini 
replevit  orbem  terrarum,"  etc. 

II.  Maccab.  VI.  18  VII.  i.  et 
seqq. 


Tract,  in  Ps.  LXVI.  9. 
"Et  per  Salomonem:  'Initium 
sapientiae  timor  Domini  est.'  " 

Tract,  in  Ps.  LXVIIL  19. 

" — postea  in  terris  visus  sit, 
et  inter  homines  conversatus 
sit." 

Tract,  in  Ps.  CXVIII.  8. 

" — et  rursum  propheta:  'Mag- 
na enim  sunt  judicia  tua,  et 
inenarrabilia.'  " 

Ibid.  Littera  V.  9. 

"Si  Apostoli  docent,  prior  ille 
docuit:  'Constituit  enim  Sap- 
ientia  amicos  Dei  et  pro- 
phetas.'" 


Ibid.  Littera  XIX.  8. 

"Et  Spiritus  Dei,  secundum 
Prophetam,  replevit  orbem  ter- 
rarum." 


Tract,  in  Ps.  CXXV.  4. 

"Testes  sunt  mihi  tres  pueri 
inter  flammas  cantantes  (Dan. 
III.  24  et  seqq.),  testis  Daniel 
in  fame  leonum  prophetae  pran- 
dio  saturatus  (Dan.  XIV.  35); 
testis  Eleazar  inter  jura  dom- 
inorum  patriis  suis  legibus  li- 
ber; testes  cum  matre  sua 
martyres  septem,  Deo  gratias 
inter  nova  mortis  tormenta 
referentes." 

Tract,  in  Ps.  CXXV.  6. 

" — et  cantantes  ex  Lege:  'Do- 
minus   conterens  bella,    Dom- 
inus  nomen  est  illi.'" 
Certainly  Hilary  denied  not  inspiration  to  a  book  which 
he  honored  by  the  august  name  of  the  "Law." 


Judith  XVI.  3. 
"Dominus    conterens     bella, 
Dominus  nomen  est  illi." 


408 


THE   CANON    OF  THE   IV.  CENTURY 


Sap.  VIII.  2. 

"Hanc  amavi,  et  exquisivi 
a  juventute  mea,  et  quaesivi 
sponsam  mihi  earn  assumere,  et 
amator  factus  sum  formse  il- 
lius." 

Ibid.  3. 

''Generositatem  illius  glorifi- 
cat  contubemium  habens  Dei: 
sed  et  omnium  Dominus  dilexit 
illam— ." 

Ibid.  8. 

**Et  si  multitudinem  scien- 
tiae,  desiderat  quis,  scit  praete- 
rita,  et  de  futuris  aestimat,"  etc. 

Ibid.  2. 

(Already  quoted.) 


Tob.  XII.  12. 

' '  Quando  orabas  cum  lacrymis 
et  sepeliebas  mortuos,,et  dere- 
linquebas  prandium  tuum,  et 
mortuos  abscondebas  per  diem 
in  domo  tua,  et  nocte  sepeliebas 
eos,  ego  obtuli  orationem  tuam 
Domino." 

II.  Maccab.  VI.  21. 

"Hi  autem,  qui  astabant,  ini- 
quamiserationecommoti,  prop- 
ter antiquam  viri  amicitiam, 
tollentes  eum  secreto,  rogabant 
ailerri  cames,  quibus  vesci  ei 
licebat,  ut  simularetur  mandu- 
casse,  sicut  rex  imperaverat  de 
sacrificii  camibus — ." 


Tract,  in  Ps.  CXXVIII.  9. 

** Salomon  itaque  ait:  'Quae- 
sivi sapientiam  sponsam  ad- 
ducere  mihi  ipsi.'  " 


Ibid. 

" — hujus  sponsae  suae  opes 
memorat  dicens:  'Honestatem 
glorificat  convictum  Dei  ha- 
bens, et  omnium  Dominus  di- 
lexit eam.'  " 

Ibid. 

" — et  si  multam  quis  cog- 
nitionem  desiderat,  novit  et 
quae  a  principio  sunt,  et  quae 
futura  sunt  conspicit." 

Ibid. 

** — de  qua  et  rursum  ait:  *Ju- 
dicavi  igitur  hanc  adducere  ad 
convivendum  mecum,  et  ama- 
tor factus  sum  pulchritudinis 
ejus.'  " 

Tract,  in  Ps.  CXXIX.  7. 

"Sunt,  secundum  Raphael  ad 
Tobiam  loquentem,  angeli  as- 
sistentes  ante  claritatem  Dei, 
et  orationes  deprecantium  ad 
Deum  deferentes." 


Tract,  in  Ps.  CXXXIV.  25. 

"Sanctus  etiam  Eleazar,  cum 
a  principibus  populi  sui  degus- 
tare  ementitum  sacrificium  co- 
geretur,  gloriam  martyrii  sub 
hac  eadem  voce  consummat, 
sciens,"  etc. 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   IV.  CENTURY 


409 


Sap.  I.  7. 

*'Quoniam  spiritus  Domini 
replevit  orbem  terranim,"  etc. 

Eccli.  XXVIII.  28,  29. 

"Sepi  aures  tuas  spinis,  lin- 
guam  nequam  noli  audire,  et 
ori  tuo  facito  ostia,  et  seras. 
Aunim  tuum  et  argentum 
tuum  confla,  et  verbis  tuis  fa- 
cito stateram,  et  frenos  ori  tuo 
rectos — ." 

Sap.  II.  12,  13. 

"Circumveniamus  ergo  jus- 
tum,  quoniam  inutilis  est  no- 
bis, et  contrarius  est  operibus 
nostris,  .  .  .  et  filium  Dei  se 
nominat." 

Sap.  XIII.  5. 

" — a  raagnitudine  enim  spe- 
ciei  et  creaturae,  cognoscibiliter 
poterit  Creator  horum  videri." 


Dan.  XIII.  42. 

"Exclamavit  autem  voce 
magna  Susanna,  et  dixit:  Deus 
aeteme,  qui  absconditorum  es 
cognitor,  qui  nosti  omnia,  ante- 
quam  fiant — ." 

II.  Maccab.  VII.  28. 

"Peto,  nate,  ut  aspicias  ad 
coelum  et  terram,  et  ad  omnia 
quaejin  eis  sunt,  et  intelligas, 
quia  ex  nihilo  fecit  ilia  Deus,  et 
hominum  genus — ." 


Tract,  in  Ps.  CXXXV.  11. 

" — docet  propheta  dicens: 
'Spiritus  Dei  replevit  orbem 
terrarum.'  " 

Tract,  in  Ps.  CXL.  5. 

" — ita  monemur:  *Ecce  cir- 
cumvalla  possessionem  tuam 
spinis;  argentum  et  aurum 
tuum  constitue,  et  ori  tuo  fac 
ostium,  et  seram,  et  verbis 
tuis  jugum  et  mensuram.'  " 

Tract,  de  Ps.  XLI.  12. 

"Vox  cataractas  fuit:  'Oppri- 
mamus  justum,  quia  in-utilis  est 
nobis,  et  contrarius  est  operibus 
nostris,  et  filium  Dei  se  nomi- 
nat.' " 

De  Trinitate  Lib.  I.  7. 

*' — hunc  de  Deo  pulcherri- 
mae  sententiae  modum  pro- 
pheticis  vocibus  apprehendit: 
*De  magnitudine  enim  operum 
et  pulchritudine  creaturarum 
consequenter  generationum 
Condi  tor  conspicitur. '  " 

Ibid.  Lib.  IV.  8. 

" — sicut  beata  Susanna  dicit: 
'Deus  aeterne,  absconditorum 
cognitor,  sciens  omnia  ante 
genera tionem  eorum.'  " 

Ibid.  16. 

"Omnia  enim  secundum  Pro- 
phetam  facta  ex  nihilo  sunt." 


410 


THE    CANON   OF   THE  IV.  CENTURY 


11.  Maccab.  VII.  9. 

** — et  in  ultimo  spiritu  con- 
sti tutus,  sic  ait:  Tu  quidem, 
scelestissime,  in  praesenti  vita 
nos  perdis:  sed  Rex  mundi  de- 
functos  nos  pro  suis  legibus  in 
aetemae  vitae  resurrectione  sus- 
citabit." 

Eccli.  XXI.  I. 

**Fili,  peccasti?  non  adjicias 
iterum:  sed  et  de  pristinis  de- 
precare,  ut  tibi  dimittentur. " 

Sap.  II.  23. 

"Quoniam  Deus  creavit  ho- 
minem  inexterminabilem,"  etc. 


Lib.  Contra  Const.  Imp.  6. 

" — sciat  a  martyre  esse  dic- 
tum regi  Antiocho:  'Tu  quidem, 
iniquus,  de  presenti  vita  nos 
perdis,  sed  Rex  mundi  defunc- 
tos  nos  pro  suis  legibus  in  aeter- 
nam  vitam  in  resurrectione 
suscitabit.'  " 

Ex  Operibus  Historicis  Frag. 
III.  24. 

"Nee  Dominum  audiunt  di- 
centem:  'Peccasti?  quiesce.'  " 

Epistola  VIII. 

**  Salomon  clamat  dicens: 
'Deus  condidit  hominem  ad  im- 
mortalitatem.'  " 

Ibid.  IX. 

"Clamat  Propheta  dicens: 
*Et  pauperem  et  divitem  ego 
feci,  et  pro  omnibus  asqualis 
cura  est  mihi.'  " 


Sap.  VI.  8. 

"Non  enim  subtrahet  perso- 
nam cujusquam  Deus,  nee  vere- 
bitur  magnitudinem  cujus- 
quam; quoniam  pusillum  et 
magnum  ipse  fecit,  et  aequaliter 
cura  est  illi  de  omnibus." 

Hilary  has  here  explicitly  canonized  every  deuterocanonical 
hook.  He  sought  the  mystic  niimber  in  the  books  that  the 
Hebrews  received,  not  with  the  view  to  exclude  the  others 
from  divine  inspiration  but  only  classifying  the  Scriptures 
of  the  Old  Testament  in  two  general  categories  which  ex- 
isted down  to  the  time  of  the  Council  of  Trent. 

The  next  objection  which  is  urged  against  us  is  taken  from 
the  fragmentary  writing  of  Rufinus.*     The   objection  is 

*Rufinus  was  bom  at  Concordia,  a  small  village  of  Italy,  towards  the 
middle  of  the  fourth  century.  He  early  devoted  himself  to  the  acquisition 
of  knowledge,  for  which  cause  he  took  up  his  abode  at  Aquileja,  whose 
renown  as  a  seat  of  learning  had  merited  for  it  the  name  of  the  second 
Rome.  A  desire  for  sanctity  drew  him  into  a  monastery  in  this  city  wherein 
St.  Jerome  first  met  him.  There  was  fonned  between  Jerome  and  Rufinus 
the  closest  friendship,  so  that  when  Jerome  left  Aquileja  to  journey  through 
France  and  Germany,  Rufinus,  inconsolable  by  the  separation,  went  in 
search  of  him. 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY  411 

taken  from  the  Commentarius  in  S^^mbolum  Apostolorum 
36-38:  "And  therefore  it  seems  apposite  to  clearly  enu- 
merate, as  we  have  received  from  the  testimonies  of  the  Fa- 
thers, the  books  of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments,  which,  ac- 
cording to  the  tradition  of  the  ancients,  are  believed  to  be 
inspired  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  delivered  to  the  Church." 
Then  follows  a  list  of  only  the  protocanonical  works.  Con- 
tinuing, he  says:  *Tt  is  to  be  known,  however,  that  there 
are  other  books  which  have  been  called  by  the  Fathers  not 
canonical  but  ecclesiastical.  Such  are  the  Wisdom  which 
is  called  of  Solomon,  and  the  other  Wisdom  which  is  called 
of  the  Son  of  Sirach,  which  book  in  the  Latin  tongue  is  called 
by  the  general  term  of  Ecclesiasticus,  by  which  term  not 
the  author  but  the  quality  of  the  Scripture  is  designated. 
Of  the  same  order  are  the  books  of  Tobias  and  Judith  and 
the  books  of  Maccabees,  and  in  the  New  Testament  the  book 
which  is  called  the  Pastor  of  Hermas,  and  the  Two  Ways  or 

Rufinus  visited  Egypt,  and  there  formed  a  lasting  friendship  with  the 
celebrated  St.  Melania.  He  siiifered  many  persecutions  from  the  Arians. 
He  was  sent  into  exile,  from  which  Melania  ransomed  him,  and  both  re- 
tired to  Palestine. 

The  esteem  in  which  Jerome  at  this  time  held  Rufinus  may  be  known 
from  the  following,  written  to  a  friend  in  Jerusalem:  "You  will  see  shine 
in  Rufinus  the  character  of  sanctity,  while  I  am  but  dust.  My  feeble  eyes 
can  scarce  bear  the  effulgence  of  his  virtues.  He  comes  even  now  from  the 
cleansing  crucible  of  persecution,  and  is  now  whiter  than  snow,  while  I  am 
stained  by  all  sorts  of  sins." 

Rufinus  built  a  monastery  on  Mt.  Olivet,  and  there  labored  zealously 
and  fruitfully  in  apostolic  work.  Having  become  conversant  with  Greek 
while  in  Alexandria,  he  translated  into  Latin  various  works  of  the  Greek 
tongue.  Among  others,  he  translated  the  Principles  of  Origen.  This  led 
to  a  rupture  with  St.  Jerome,  and  there  is  nothing  so  bitter  in  patristic 
literature  as  Jerome's  subsequent  invective  against  Rufinus.  This  divis- 
ion was  a  cause  of  much  scandal  in  the  Church.  That  Rufinus  led  a 
saintly  life  can  not  be  doubted,  but  it  seems  quite  certain  that  he  became 
in  his  later  years  infected  with  the  errors  of  Origen.  Rufinus  declared 
that  he  had  acted  as  a  mere  translator  of  the  works  of  Origen,  and  Pope 
Anastasius,  before  whom  he  was  cited,  declared  that  he  would  leave  to  God 
to  judge  of  his  intention.  We  must  do  the  same,  but  in  justification  to 
St.  Jerome,  it  must  be  said  that  his  zeal  for  orthodoxy  caused  him  to  re- 
pudiate the  man  whom  he  had  once  called  friend. 

The  most  important  of  Rufinus'  works  are :  De  Benedictionibus  Patri- 
archarum,  Commentarius  in  Symboliun  Apostolorum,  Historia  Monacho- 
rum,  Historia  Ecclesiastica,  Apologia  contra  Hieronymum  and  an  Apologia 
ad  Anastasium  Papam.     He  died  in  Sicily  in  410. 


412  THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY 

Choice  of  Peter.  All  these  books,  they  (the  Fathers)  wished 
to  be  read  in  the  churches,  but  not  to  be  used  for  the  con- 
firmation of  dogma." 

The  testimony  of  Rufinus  well  illustrates  the  position  of 
the  deuterocanonical  books  in  that  age.  The  Church,  as 
the  divine  institution  of  Christ,  used  them,  and  the  faith- 
ful drew  their  spiritual  teaching  from  them.  At  the  same 
time,  some  of  the  Fathers  induced  a  scientific  distinction 
between  them  and  the  books  of  the  first  canon.  This  scien- 
tific distinction  was  purely  a  critical  judgment  of  the  Fathers, 
and  was  not  aimed  at  denying  to  these  books  divine  inspira- 
tion. There  had  been  no  decree  of  the  Church,  and  these 
books  had  not  as  much  extrinsically  in  their  favor  as  the 
others.  The  extremely  conservative  spirit  of  the  Fathers 
was  content  to  use  them  as  divine  Scripture  in  their  practical 
use  of  Scripture ;  while,  in  drawing  up  official  lists  of  Scrip- 
tures, they  hesitated  to  make  them  equal  with  the  books 
which  the  Church  had  received  from  the  Synagogue.  In 
the  growth  and  development  of  doctrine,  this  hesitancy  has 
been  excluded  by  the  vital  power  in  the  Church.  In  the  few 
writings  of  Rufinus  which  remain  to  us,  we  find  the  following 
quotations  of  deuterocanonical  Scripture : 

Eccli  XXXIV.  9.  Benedictio  Gad  3. 

"Qui  non  est  tentatus,  quid        " — ^ita  enim  Scriptura  dicit: 
scit?  Vir  inmultisexpertus,  CO-     'Qui  non  est  tentatus,  non  est 
gitabit  multa ;  et  qui  multa  didi-     probabilis. '  ' ' 
cit,  enarrabit  intellectum. ' ' 

Eccli.  XI.  30.  Benedictio  Joseph  3 . 

"Ante  mortem  ne  laudes  ho-  " — sed  et  sanctoe  Scripturce 
minem  quemquam,  quoniam  in  sententia  est:  'Ne  laudaveris 
filiis  suis  agnoscitur  vir."  quemquam  ante  obitum.' '' 

Comment.  inSymbolum  Apost. 
Baruch  III.  36-38.  5. 

''Hie  est  Deus  noster,  et  non  ''Quod  et  Propheta  prsedixe- 

aestimabitur alius adversus eum.  rat  ubi  ait:  'Hie   Deus  noster, 

Hie  adinvenit  omnem  viam  dis-  non  reputabitur  alter  ad  eum. 

ciplinae,  et  tradidit  illam  Jacob  In venit  omnem  viam  disciplinae, 

puero  suo,  et  Israel  dilectosuo.  et  dedit  eam  Jacob  puero  suo  et 

Post  haec  in  terris  visus  est,  et  Israel  dilecto  suo ;  post  haec  in 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY  413 

cum    hominibus     conversatus     terris  visus  est  et  inter  homines 
est."  conversatus  est.'' 

Sap.  III.  7.  Ibid.     46. 

"Fulgebuntjusti,ettamquam  '' — non  erit  difficile  credere 
scintillae  in  arundineto  discur-  etiam  ilia  quae  Prophetce  prce- 
rent."  dixerant:    'Quod    justi    scilicet 

fulgebunt  sicut  sol,  et  sicut 
splendor  firmamenti  in  regno 
Dei." 

Certainly  the  man  who  quoted  these  lines  believed  that  he 
was  employing  Holy  Scripture.    - 

In  his  Apologia  Contra  Hieronymum,  Lib.  II.  from  the 
thirty-second  to  the  thirty-seventh  paragraph,  Rufinus  bit- 
terly inveighs  against  St.  Jerome  for  having  dared  to  cut  off 
the  deuterocanonical  books.*  Hence  in  justice  and  right, 
Rufinus  must  be  considered  in  every  way  favorable  to  the 
deuterocanonical  works.  We  now  come  to  the  Achilles  of 
our  adversaries,  St.  Jerome,  a  man  more  versed  in  the  Scrip- 
tures than  any  other  of  the  Fathers  up  to  his  day.  He  has 
in  many  places,  in  no  dubious  terms,  expressed  his  opposi- 
tion to  the  deuterocanonical  books.  As  Jerome  is  insepar- 
ably linked  with  the  Latin  Vulgate,  we  deem  it  not  amiss  to 
insert  here  an  abstract  of  his  life. 

Jerome  was  bom  about  the  year  342  at  Stridon,  on  the 
borders  of  Dalmatia  and  Pannonia,  in  the  midst  of  a  semi- 
barbaric  population    [De    viris   illustribus,  cap.   CXXXV.] 

*An  ut  divinarum  Scripturarum  libros,  quos  ad  plenissimum  fidei 
Instrumentum  Ecclesiis  Christi  Apostoli  tradiderunt,  nova  nunc  et  a 
Judaeis  mutata  interpretation e  mutares?  .  ,  ,  Quis  praesumserit  sacras 
Sancti  Spiritus  voces  et  divina  Voltiniina  temerare  ?  Quis  praeter  te  divino 
muneri  et  Apostolorum  haereditati  manus  intulerit. 

Et  quidem  cum  ingens  copia  fuisse  ex  initio  in  Ecclesiis  Dei,  et  preci- 
pue  Jerosolymis  eorum,  qui  ex  circumcisione  crediderant,  referatur,  in 
quibus  utique  linguae  utriusque  perfectam  fuisse  scientiam,  et  legis  per- 
itiam  probabilem,  administrati  pontificatus  testatur  officium.  Quis  ergo 
in  ista  eruditorum  virorum  copia  ausus  est  Instrumentum  divinum,  quod 
Apostoli  Ecclesiis  tradiderunt,  et  depositum  Sancti  Spiritus  compilare? 
An  non  est  compilare  cum  quaedam  quidem  immutantur,  et  error  dicitur 
corrigi?  Nam  omnis  ilia  historia  de  Susanna,  quae  castitatis  exemplum 
praebebat  Ecclesiis  Dei,  ab  isto  abscissa  est  et  abjecta  atque  posthabita. 
Trium  pueromm  hymnus,  qui  maxime  diebus  solemnibus  in  Ecclesia  Dei 
canitur,  ab  isto  e  loco  suo  penitus  erasus  est.     Et  quid  per  singula  com- 


414  THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY 

His  parents,  however,  were  wealthy  Christians,  and  in  a 
letter  to  Theophilus,  the  Patriarch  of  Alexandria,  he  testified 
to  the  pious  care  which  from  his  earliest  childhood  had 
nourished  him  with  the  milk  of  the  Catholic  doctrine .  [Epist . 
LXXII.  ad  Theophilum,  2.]  He  was  called  Eusebius  after 
his  father,  for  Hieronymus  or  Heirome  was  merely  a  sur- 
name, or  what  in  Latin  is  termed  cognomen.  His  mother's 
name  we  do  not  know.  Besides  an  aunt,  Castorina,  who 
seems  to  have  shown  him  small  affection,  [Epist.  XIII.  ad 
Castorinam  Materteram]  Jerome  had  a  sister,  a  cause  of 
many  anxieties,  and  one  brother,  Paulinian,  whom  he  later 
took  with  him  to  Palestine  from  Rome. 

The  young  Dalmatian  began  his  studies  at  Stridon,  and 
at  the  age  of  eighteen  he  went  with  Bonosus,  a  friend  of  his 
childhood,  to  continue  them  at  Rome,  where  he  attended 
the  lessons  of  Donatus,  the  grammarian,  and  possibly  those 
of  Victorinus,  whose  humble  and  courageous  conversion  has 
been  immortalized  in  the  Confessions  of  St.  Augustine. 
[Confession,  lib.  VIII.,  cap.  11.] 

Reading,  in  which  his  eager  soul  found  its  outlet  (he  tells 
us  himself  that  he  studied  Prophyry's  Introduction,  Alex- 
ander of  Aphrodisias'  Commentaries  upon  Aristotle,  and 
Plato's  Dialogues),  completed  his  masters'  teaching;  and  his 
passion  for  books,  which  he  confesses  were  indispensable  to 
him,  enabled  him  to  acquire,  at  the  cost  of  the  most  arduous 

memoro  de  his,  quorum  comprehendere  numerum  nequeo?  De  quo  ut 
omittam  illud  dicere,  quod  Septuaginta  duorum  virorum  per  cellulas  in- 
terpretantium  unam  et  consonam  vocem,  dubitandum  non  est,  Spiritus 
Sancti  inspiratione  prolatam,  et  majoris  id  debere  esse  auctoritatis,  quam 
id  quod  ab  uno  homine,  sibi  Barraba  aspirante,  translatum  est.  Ut  ergo 
hoc  omittam,  vide  quid  dicimus,  verbi  causa.  Petrus  Romanse  Ecclesiae 
per  viginti  et  quatuor  annos  prasfuit:  dubitandum  non  est,  quin  sicut  cae- 
tera,  quas  ad  instructionem  pertinent,  etiam  librorum  Instrumenta  Eccles- 
iae ipse  tradiderit,  quag  utique  jam  tunc,  ipso  sedente  et  docente,  recita- 
bantur?  Quid  ergo?  Decepit  Petrus  Apostolus  Christi  Ecclesiam,  et 
libros  ei  falsos  et  nihil  veritatis  continentes  tradidit,  et  cum  sciret,  quod 
vertim  est  haberi  apud  Judaeos,  apud  Christianos  volebat  haberi  quod 
falsum  est?  Sed  fortasse  dicit,  quia  sine  Uteris  erat  Petrus,  et  sciebat 
quidem  Judaeorum  libros  magis  esse  veros,  quam  istos,  qui  erant  in  Eccle- 
sia :  sed  interpretari  non  poterat  propter  sermonis  imperitiam  ?  Et  quid  ? 
Nihil  in  isto  agebat  ignea  lingua  per  Spiritum  Sanctum  caelitus  data  ? 
Non  ergo  omnibus  Unguis  loquebantur  Apostoli  ?  .   .   . 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY  415 

labor,  that  is  by  copying  them  with  his  own  hand,  an  exten- 
sive Hbrary.  Epist.  XXII  ad  Eustochium,  30.]  Thus  was 
Jerome  unconsciously  preparing  himself  for  the  great  works 
which  were  to  fill  his  life. 

He  was  as  yet  only  a  catechumen,  for  in  those  early 
centuries  they  frequently  waited  until  the  perilous  ways  of 
youth  had  been  safely  traversed  before  conferring  baptism, 
and  the  Christian  initiation  was  sometimes  deferred  from 
reasons  of  prudence.  To  know,  however,  that  this  prudence 
was  liable  to  terrible  mistakes  one  has  only  to  recall  the 
anguish  of  Gregory  Nazianzen  and  of  Satirus,  St.  Ambrose's 
brother,  who  both,  when  overtaken  by  a  tempest  at  sea,  were 
terrified  at  the  thought  of  dying  unbaptized.  It  was  especi- 
ally the  fear  of  the  restraints  imposed  by  the  Christian  life 
which  deferred  for  years  the  baptism  of  many,  and  we  are 
told  by  St.  Augustine  that  the  deviations  of  the  unbaptized 
were  freely  excused  by  a  spirit  of  general  tolerance.  [Con- 
fession, lib.  I.,  cap.  XI.] 

More  fortunate  in  this  respect  than  the  son  of  Monica, 
Jerome,  as  he  wrote  to  Theophilus  of  Alexandria,  never  fell 
into  error.  He  used  often  to  interrupt  his  studies  in  order 
to  visit  the  basilicas  of  the  saints  or  to  descend  into  the  cata- 
combs, and  when  an  old  man  he  thus  described  these  pilgrim- 
ages in. his  ''Commentaries  upon  Ezekiel."  "In  my  youth, 
when  I  was  studying  literature  in  Rome,  it  was  my  custom 
to  visit  on  Sundays,  with  some  companions  of  my  own  age 
and  tastes,  the  tombs  of  the  martyrs  and  apostles.  I  often 
wandered  into  those  subterranean  galleries  whose  walls  on 
either  side  preserve  the  relics  of  the  dead,  and  where  the 
darkness  is  so  intense  that  one  might  almost  believe  that 
the  words  of  the  prophet  had  been  fulfilled :  'Let  them  go 
down  alive  into  hell.'  A  gleam  of  light  shining  through  a 
narrow  aperture,  rather  than  a  window,  scarcely  affected  the 
awful  obscurity,  and  the  little  band,  shrouded  in  darkness 
and  able  only  to  proceed  one  step  at  a  time,  would  recall  this 
verse  of  Virgil's  'Everywhere  horror  and  even  the  very  silence 
appal  me.'  "     [Comment,  in  Ezech.,  lib.  XII.,  CXL.] 

In  his  youth  Jerome  witnessed  the  attempts  made  by 
Julian  to  restore  paganism,  and  he  saw  also  the  utter  failure 


416  THE    CANON   OF   THE  IV.  CENTURY 

in  which  they  resulted.  * 'While  I  was  attending  the  schools 
of  the  grammarians,"  he  wrote,  "when  every  town  was 
stained  with  the  blood  of  idolatrous  sacrifices,  suddenly  at  the 
very  height  of  the  persecution  Julian's  death  was  announced 
to  us.  *How,'  exclaimed  a  pagan,  and  not  unreasonably, 
*do  the  Christians  say  that  theirs  is  a  patient  and  a  merciful 
God?  There  is  nothing  more  terrible,  nothing  more  swift 
than  His  wrath.  He  could  not  even  for  an  instant  defer  His 
vengeance.'  "     [Comment  in  Habacuc.     Lib.  II.  cap.  III.] 

The  faith  which  had  so  early  been  instilled  into  Jerome 
and  which  was  so  precious  to  him,  did  not,  however,  shield 
him  from  the  seductions  of  Rome,  but  unlike  Augustine, 
who  wrote  the  humble  confession  of  his  protracted  sins,  he 
only  alludes  to  his  in  passing.  "You  know,"  he  wrote  Chro- 
matius,  "how  slipper>^  are  those  pathways  of  youth  where  I 
succumbed."  In  a  letter  to  Heliodorus,  whom  he  wished 
to  take  with  him  into  the  desert,  and  whom  he  rebuked  for 
his  delay,  he  was  more  explicit:  "Why  linger  in  the  world, 
thou  who  hast  already  chosen  solitude?  If  I  give  thee  this 
advice  it  is  not  as  if  my  ship  and  my  cargo  were  undamaged, 
not  as  if  I  were  ignorant  of  the  deep,  but  rather  as  one  ship- 
wrecked and  just  cast  up  upon  the  shore,  in  feeble  tones  I 
warn  the  navigators  of  their  peril."  [Epist.  XIV.  ad  Helio- 
dorum,  6.] 

There  is  another  difference  between  Augustine  and 
Jerome  worthy  of  notice.  It  is  evident  that  after  the  supreme 
struggles  of  which  Augustine  has  given  us  a  dramatic  account 
he  experienced  no  further  aggression  of  the  vanquished  foe. 
The  luring  voices  which  made  one  final  effort  to  woo  him  to 
excess  were  silenced,  and  no  doubt  remained  so  forever,  for 
after  his  conversion  Augustine  seems  to  have  inhabited 
serene  heights  inaccessible  to  any  disturbing  memories  of 
the  past ;  but  Jerome,  who  was  by  nature  more  ardent  and 
perhaps  less  gentle  than  the  son  of  Monica,  could  not  forget 
so  quickly.  Beguiling  visions  followed  him  to  the  desert  of 
Chalcis,  and  he  succeeded  in  exorcising  them  only  through 
ceaseless  work  and  penances. 

From  Rome  the  young  Dalmatian,  with  Bonosus,  passed 
into  Gaul  and  repaired  to  Treves,  where  Valentinian  I.  then 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY  417 

resided,  and  it  was  in  Gaul  that  Jerome  determined  to  re- 
nounce the  world  which  had  so  wounded  him  and  devote 
himself  to  the  service  of  Jesus  Christ.  He  accordingly 
returned  to  Rome  and  was  baptized  there  by  Liberius.  This 
Pope  having  died  on  the  twenty- fourth  of  September  366, 
Jerome's  baptism  could  not  have  taken  place  at  a  later  date. 
Leaving  Rome  he  started  for  Aquileia,  where  religious  studies 
and  monastic  discipline  flourished,  and  which  was  at  that 
time  an  important  town  and  the  capital  of  its  native  province. 
His  stay  at  Aquileia  was  only  the  first  halt  in  a  life  of 
travel.  From  that  time  forth  trials  beset  him.  "He  was 
already  beginning,"  says  Tillemont,  ''tomake  enemies  whose 
persecutions  were  sufficiently  violent  to  oblige  him  to  move 
from  place  to  place,  and  serious  enough  to  reach  the  ears  of 
the  Pope  Damasus."  [Memoirs,  etc.,  St.  Jerome.  Article 
IV.]  One  of  his  adversaries  was  the  Bishop  Lupicinus. 
Finally  he  determined  to  go  to  the  East  and,  following  Bar- 
onius'  example,  before  leaving  the  Western  Hemisphere  he 
paid  a  visit  to  his  native  town  and  there  bade  farewell  to  his 
own  people  forever.  He  did  not  attempt  to  conceal  the 
painful  effort  the  breaking  of  these  family  ties  cost  him. 
"Whenever  the  impress  of  your  familiar  hands  recalls  your 
dear  faces  to  me,  then  am  I  no  longer  where  I  am,  or  rather 
you  are  there  with  me."  [Epist.  VH.  ad  Chromatium  Jov- 
inum  et  Eusebium.]  The  man  who  sent  such  a  message,  a 
message  perhaps  more  touching  than  well  expressed,  to  those 
from  whom  he  was  separated,  the  man  who  appreciated  so 
keenly  the  bonds  of  friendship,  was  certainly  not  insensible 
to  those  of  blood.  "Full  do  I  know,"  he  wrote  to  Helio- 
dorus,  "what  fetters  hold  thee  back.  My  heart  is  not  of 
stone  nor  my  bowels  of  iron,  I  was  not  begotten  by  rocks 
nor  suckled  by  the  tigresses  of  Hyrcania ;  I  also  have  gone 
through  the  anguish  which  thou  dreadest."  [Epist.  XIV. 
ad  Heliodorum,  3.]  Jerome  probably  had  as  travelling 
companions  this  same  Heliodorus,  and  also  Innocentius  and 
Hylas,  whom  we  again  meet  at  his  side  in  the  East  when, 
as  Tillemont,  who  translated  the  works  of  the  Saints,  tells : 
"He  set  out  carrying  with  him  the  library  he  had  collected 
in  Rome,  travelled  over  many  provinces,  passed   through 

(27)  H.S. 


418  THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY 

Thrace,  Pontus  and  Bithynia,  crossed  the  whole  of  Galatia 
and  Cappadocia,  suffered  the  intolerable  heat  of  Cilicia  .  .  . 
and  finally  in  Syria  found  the  peace  which  he  sought  as  a 
safe  harbor  after  shipwreck." 

Before  retiring  into  the  desert,  however,  he  spent  a  few 
days  at  Antioch  with  Evagrius,  a  priest  of  that  city,  whom 
Jerome  had  known  in  Italy,  whither  he  had  gone  to  lay  the 
discords  in  his  Church  before  the  Western  bishops,  and  who 
on  his  return  became  the  guide  and  sponsor  of  Jerome  and 
his  companions  in  Antioch. 

Jerome,  inflamed  with  an  ardor  for  study  which  never 
cooled,  wished  to  hear  the  men  most  learned  in  the  Scrip- 
tures, and  especially  Apollinaris,  Bishop  of  Laodicea,  who  at 
that  period  had  not  yet  fallen  into  his  later  notorious  heresy. 
It  was  probably  about  this  time  that  Jerome  knew  the  her- 
mit Malchus,  but  it  was  not  until  long  after  that  he  related 
his  wonderful  history,  which  Lafontaine  has  translated  into 
graceful  verse. 

Jerome,  however,  had  left  Aquileia,  not  for  Antioch,  but 
bound  for  the  wilderness.  He  plunged  into  the  heart  of  the 
desert  of  Chalcis,  where,  under  burning  skies  and  amid  vast 
tracts  of  sand  out  of  which  sprang  here  and  there  a  few 
scattered  convents,  he  had  gone  to  seek  repentance,  and  where 
he  found  fresh  sorrows  awaiting  him.  Heliodorus  returned 
to  the  West,  and  Jerome's  friendship  for  Innocent  and  Hylas 
was  ruthlessly  severed  by  their  death.  But  the  memories  of 
his  libertine  youth,  which  troubled  the  peace  of  his  soul  and 
threatened  to  sully  a  chastity  so  dearly  bought,  caused  him  a 
still  keener  grief  than  the  loss  of  his  friends,  and  he  has  left  us  a 
description  of  his  anguish,  of  his  almost  desperate  but  finally 
victorious  struggles,  in  pages  of  striking  eloquence  and  immor- 
tal beauty.  "How  often,"  he  wTote,  "buried  in  this  vast 
wilderness,  scorched  by  the  rays  of  the  sun,  have  I  imagined 
myself  in  the  midst  of  the  pleasures  of  Rome.  I  sat  alone 
because  my  heart  was  filled  with  exceeding  bitterness.  My 
limbs  were  covered  with  imsightly  sackcloth,  and  my  black- 
ened skin  gave  me  the  appearance  of  an  Ethiopian.  I 
wept  and  groaned  daily,  and  if  in  spite  of  my  struggles  sleep 
overcame  me,  the  bones  in  my  emaciated  body,  which  sank 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY  419 

to  the  naked  earth,  barely  clave  together.  I  do  not  men- 
tion my  nourishment  or  drink,  for  in  this  desert  even  the 
sick  monks  scarcely  dare  touch  fresh  water,  and  to  eat  cooked 
food  would  be  considered  an  excess.  And  I,  who,  through 
the  fear  of  hell,  had  condemned  myself  to  this  prison  inhab- 
ited by  scorpions  and  serpents,  imagined  myself  transported 
into  the  midst  of  the  dances  of  the  young  Roman  maidens. 
My  face  was  pallid  with  fasting,  my  body  cold  as  ice,  yet 
my  soul  burned  with  sensual  emotion  and  in  flesh  already  dead 
only  the  fire  of  the  passions  was  still  capable  of  kindling. 
Debarred  from  all  help  I  threw  myself  at  the  feet  of  Jesus, 
watered  them  with  my  tears,  wiped  them  with  my  hair,  and 
strove  to  subdue  my  rebellious  flesh  by  weeks  of  abstinence. 
I  do  not  blush  to  own  to  my  misery,  rather  do  I  weep  that  I 
am  no  longer  as  I  once  was.  I  remember  having  often  spent 
the  entire  day  and  night  in  crying  aloud  and  in  beating  my 
breast,  until,  at  the  command  of  God,  who  rules  the  tempest, 
peace  crept  back  into  my  soul.  I  even  dreaded  my  cell  as  if 
it  had  been  an  accomplice  to  my  thoughts.  Angry  with 
myself  I  penetrated  alone  further  into  the  desert,  and  if  I 
discovered  any  dark  valley,  any  rugged  motintain,  any  rock 
of  difficult  access,  it  was  the  spot  I  fixed  upon  to  pray  in,  and 
to  make  into  a  prison  for  my  wretched  body.  God  is  witness 
that  sometimes,  after  having  long  fixed  my  eyes  upon  heaven 
and  after  copious  weeping,  I  believed  myself  transported 
among  the  choir  of  angels.  Then  in  a  trusting  and  joyful 
ecstasy  I  sang  unto  the  Lord :  *  We  pursue  Thee  by  the  scent 
of  Thy  perfumes.'  "     [Epist.  XXII.  ad  Eustochium,  7.] 

In  order  to  subdue  his  flesh  and  curb  his  imagination, 
Jerome  had  recourse  to  other  means  besides  corporal  punish- 
ment. ''When  I  was  young,"  he  wrote,  "although  buried 
in  the  desert,  I  could  not  conquer  my  burning  passions  and 
ardent  nature,  and  in  spite  of  my  body  being  exhausted  by 
perpetual  fasts  my  brain  was  on  fire  with  evil  thoughts. 
Finally,  as  a  last  resource,  I  put  myself  under  the  tutelage 
of  a  certain  monk,  a  Jew  who  had  become  a  Christian,  and, 
forsaking  the  ingenious  precepts  of  Quintilian,  the  floods  of 
eloquencejpoured  forth  by  Cicero,  the  grave  utterances  of 
Fronto,  and  the  tender  words  of  Pliny,  I  began  to  learn  the 


420  THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY 

Hebrew  alphabet,  and  to  study  this  language  of  hissing  and 
harsh-sounding  words.  I  who  have  suffered  so  much,  and 
with  me  those  who  at  that  time  shared  my  life,  can  alone 
testify  to  the  efforts  I  wasted,  the  difficulties  I  went  through, 
and  how  often  I  despairingly  interrupted  my  studies,  which  a 
dogged  determination  to  learn  made  me  afterwards  resume ; 
and  I  give  thanks  unto  God  that  from  such  a  bitter  sowing  I 
am  now  able  to  gather  such  sweet  fruit."  [Epist.  CXXV.  ad 
Rusticum  monachum,  12.] 

It  was  probably  at  this  period,  that  is  in  374,  that  the 
mysterious  dream  of  which  Jerome  has  left  us  a  dramatic 
account  came  to  him.  Imbued  with  the  works  of  classic 
antiquity,  he  cherished  a  love  for  them .  ' ' Miserable  wretch , ' ' 
he  wrote,  "I  fasted  before  reading  Cicero;  after  nights  spent 
in  vigil,  after  tears  wrung  from  me  by  the  memory  of  my 
sins,  I  would  take  up  Plautus,  and  when,  on  coming  to  my 
senses,  I  read  the  Prophets,  their  speech  seemed  to  me 
uncouth  and  unfinished.  Blind,  I  blamed  the  light  instead 
of  condemning  my  own  eyes."  A  vision  cured  him,  for  a 
while  at  least,  of  this  passion.  "Towards  the  middle  of  Lent 
(probably  the  Lent  of  375),  while  Satan  was  thus  mocking 
me,  I  was  seized  with  a  fever  which,  finding  my  body  ex- 
hausted by  want  of  rest,  consumed  it  to  such  an  extent  that 
my  bones  barely  clave  together.  My  body  was  becoming 
cold,  a  faint  remnant  of  warmth  however  still  enabled  my 
heart  to  beat.  They  were  preparing  my  funeral  obsequies, 
when  suddenly  my  soul  was  caught  up  from  me  and  carried 
before  the  Tribunal  of  the  Supreme  Judge.  The  light  was  so 
dazzling,  those  who  surrounded  Him  shed ,  such  a  blaze  of 
splendor,  that,  falling  back  upon  the  ground,  I  dared  not 
gaze  aloft.  They  asked  me  who  I  was  and  I  answered  a 
Christian.  Thou  Jiest,'  said  the  Judge,  'thou  are  a  Ciceronian 
and  not  a  Christian,  for  where  thy  treasure  is,  there  is  thy 
heart  also.'  I  was  silent;  and  whilst  the  blows  rained  down 
upon  me,  for  the  Judge  had  commanded  that  I  should  be 
scourged,  suffering  even  more  from  the  torment  of  my  bitter 
remorse,  I  repeated  to  myself  this  verse  on  the  Psalms: 
'Who  will  render  thee  glory  in  hell  ?'  Then  I  cried  out  weep- 
ing:    'Have  pity  on  me.  Lord,  have  pity.'     This  cry  rang 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY  421 

out  in  the  midst  of  the  blows,  and  at  last  those  who  were 
present,  throwing  themselves  at  the  feet  of  the  Judge,  en- 
treated Him  to  have  mercy  upon  my  youth,  to  grant  me  time 
to  work  out  my  repentance,  and  to  punish  me  severely  if  I 
should  again  peruse  a  pagan  book.  I,  who,  to  escape  from 
the  terrible  straits  in  which  I  found  myself  would  have 
promised  far  more,  swore  to  Him  and  said,  calling  His  name 
to  witness:  'Lord,  if  hereafter  I  harbor  or  read  any  secular 
books,  may  I  be  treated  as  if  I  had  renotinced  Thee.'  After 
this  oath  I  was  released  and  I  returned  to  earth.  Those 
present  were  astonished  to  see  me  reopen  my  eyes,  which 
were  bathed  in  such  a  flood  of  tears  that  my  grief  convinced 
the  most  sceptical.  That  it  was  not  one  of  those  vain  dreams 
by  which  we  are  deceived,  I  attest  the  Tribunal  before  which 
I  lay  prostrate  and  the  sentence  which  so  appalled  me. 
Please  God  that  I  may  never  again  be  submitted  to  such  an 
ordeal.  When  I  awoke  my  shoulders  were  bruised  and  I 
could  still  feel  the  blows.  From  that  moment  I  studied 
religious  books  with  far  more  ardor  than  I  had  ever  read  pro- 
fane ones."     [Epist.  XXII.  ad  Eustochium,  30.] 

Did  Jerome  abide  by  this  oath  throughout  his  life? 
Although  making  allowances  for  the  saint's  vigorous  mem- 
ory, to  which  reminiscences  of  Terence,  Lucretius,  Cicero, 
Virgil  and  Seneca  were  continually  recurring  (Augustine, 
at  Hippo,  preserved  the  memory  of  his  classical  education  in 
the  same  tenacious  manner),  we  have  reason  to  believe  that 
Jerome  more  than  once  opened  the  works  of  these  pagan 
authors  whom  he  had  renounced.  To  Rufinus,  whose  insid- 
ious hatred  accused  him  of  the  crime  of  perjury,  he  replied 
that  the  keeping  of  a  promise  made  in  a  dream  could  not  be 
exacted  of  him.  However,  even  if  Jerome  did  not  deem 
himself  irrevocably  bound  by  his  pledge,  he  applied  himself 
more  and  more  to  the  study  of  the  Bible,  and  his  classical 
reading  and  recollections  were  exclusively  devoted  to  defend- 
ing and  embellishing  the  truth.  This  is  what  he  pointed  out 
in  a  celebrated  letter  to  Magnus,  the  orator,  in  which,  with 
skilful  and  weighty  arguments  he  cited  the  example  of  all  his 
predecessors,  reminding  him  that  according  to  Deuteronomy 
the  Israelite  must  needs  cut  the  nails  and  hair  of  his  slave 


422  THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY 

before  marrying  her.  "Is  it  astonishing  that  profane  liter- 
ature should  have  seduced  me  by  the  grace  of  its  language 
and  by  the  beauty  of  its  form,  or  that  I  should  wish  to  con- 
vert a  slave  and  a  captive  into  a  daughter  of  Israel?  If  I 
come  across  anything  dead,  any  passage  breathing  idolatry, 
sensuality,  error,  or  evil  passions,  I  suppress  it,  and  from  my 
alliance  with  a  stainless  spouse  are  bom  servants  of  the  true 
God ;  thus  do  I  increase  the  family  of  Christ . ' '  [Epist .  LXX . 
ad  Magnum,  oratorem  urbis  Romae,  2.] 

The  questions  of  discipline  and  dogma  which  were  agitat- 
ing the  Church  of  Antioch,  disturbed  Jerome  afresh  in  his 
retreat.  Four  bishops  were  contending  for  the  Patriarchal 
See  of  the  East.  In  361,  after  the  death  of  Eustathius,  the 
intrepid  champion  of  the  Nicene  faith,  the  Arians  and  many 
Catholics  had  agreed  to  elect  Meletius  of  Sebaste,  whose 
orthodoxy,  already  attested  at  the  time  of  Constantine's 
persecution,  asserted  itself  at  Antioch  from  the  very  first, 
with  the  result  of  alienating  the  Arians,  who  chose  Euzoius 
as  their  leader.  Those  Catholics,  however,  who  were  most 
devoted  to  Eustathius'  glorious  memory,  refused  to  give 
their  support  to  a  bishop  who  had  counted  Arians  among 
his  electors.  Towards  the  end  of  379  Lucifer  of  Cagliari,  on 
his  return  from  the  exile  to  which  he  had  been  banished  by 
the  son  of  Constantine,  appointed  the  priest  Paulinus,  who 
was  recognized  by  Alexandria  and  the  West,  as  Bishop  to  the 
Eustathians.  At  the  beginning  of  376,  to  support  his  heresy 
in  introducing  the  Bishop  of  Laodicea  into  Antioch,  ApoUin- 
aris  had  the  audacity  to  assign  the  government  of  this  great 
Church  to  his  disciple  Vitalis,  whom  he  had  consecrated. 
Quite  outside  of  all  this,  the  inhabitants  of  Antioch  and  of 
the  monasteries  at  Chalcis  were  discussing  whether  they 
should  recognize  in  God  three  hypostases  or  three  persons. 
In  the  theological  language  of  to-day  the  two  terms  are 
synonymous,  but  in  the  fourth  century  they  were  not  con- 
sidered so  by  all.  At  Antioch  the  Meletians  preferred  the 
term  hypostasis  to  that  of  person,  as  being  more  explicit 
against  the  heresy  of  Sabellius ;  the  partisans  of  Paulinus,  on 
the  other  hand,  conforming  themselves  to  the  Latin  custom 
which  understood  hypostasis  and  substance  to  be  synonym- 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY  423 

ous,  considered  it  an  Arian  impiety  to  say  that  in  God  there 
were  three  hypostases.  Urged  by  the  monks  amongst 
whom  he  lived  to  pronounce  upon  the  legitimate  vicar  and 
the  orthodox  expression,  Jerome  addressed  himself  in  two 
famous  letters  to  Pope  Damasus.  Certainly  these  letters 
are  sufficient  proof  that  he  disliked  the  word  hypostasis, 
which  seemed  to  him  equivocal  or  erroneous.  Meletius 
too,  the  champion  of  this  word,  was  especially  displeasing 
to  him,  and  his  sympathies  were  entirely  drawn  towards 
Paulinus,  the  patriarch  favored  by  Latin  Christianity.  Upon 
these  points  he  asked  the  judgment  of  the  Roman  Pontiff, 
which  he  valued  above  everything,  and  to  which  he  was  will- 
ing to  submit.  **I  thought,"  he  wrote,  Damasus,  ''that  I 
ought  to  consult  the  Apostolic  See  and  the  Roman  Faith 
which  St.  Paul  the  Apostle  extolled.  I  crave  spiritual 
nourishment  from  the  Church  where  I  received  the  baptis- 
mal robe.  .  .  .  You  are  the  light  of  the  world,  the  salt  of  the 
earth,  in  your  possession  are  the  vessels  of  silver  and  gold, 
elsewhere  are  the  vessels  of  clay  and  of  wood  destined  for  the 
iron  rod  which  shall  shatter  them,  and  for  the  eternal  fires 
which  shall  consume  them." 

In  terms  which  succeeding  centuries  have  freely  quoted 
Jerome  proclaimed  the  Roman  pre-eminence  and  the  obliga- 
tion imposed  upon  all  to  conform  to  it.  "I  know  that  on 
that  stone  the  Church  was  built ;  he  who  eats  of  the  Paschal 
Lamb  outside  of  its  walls  is  an  impious  man.  He  who  has 
not  sought  refuge  in  the  Ark  of  Noah  will  be  overtaken  by  the 
deluge."  He  then  asked  Damasus  to  inform  him  which 
vicar  he  was  to  follow  and  which  term  he  was  to  employ. 
"I  do  not  know  Vitalis,  I  repudiate  Meletius,  I  ignore  Pau- 
linus. Whoever  reaps  not  with  thee,  scatters;  whoever 
belongs  not  to  Christ  belongs  to  Antichrist."  It  is  evident 
that  Jerome  could  not  accept  the  term  hypostasis  with 
enthusiasm;  he  declares  as  much  in  bitter,  almost  haughty 
tone ;  nevertheless  he  was  willing  to  accept  it  should  Dam- 
asus pronounce  its  usage  to  be  legitimate.  "I  pray  you 
decide  this  matter  for  me,  and  I  will  not  shrink  from  saying 
that  there  are  three  hypostases  in  God.  ...  I  implore  your 
Holiness  by  the  crucified  Lord,  by  the  consubstantial  Trinity, 


424  THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY 

to  write  and  authorize  me  either  to  suppress  or  use  this 
word."     [Epist.  XV.  ad  Damasum  papam.] 

Jerome  left  Chalcis,  probably  driven  from  the  desert  by- 
some  foolish  persecution,  and  joined  Evagrius  in  Antioch, 
where  Paulinus  compelled  him  to  enter  the  priesthood ;  but 
so  strong  was  his  love  of  solitude,  so  jealous  was  he  of  his 
liberty  that  he  stipulated  that  his  ordination  should  not 
bind  him  to  any  one  particular  church.  By  a  peculiarity 
which  the  Jansenists  willingly  proposed  as  a  model,  Jerome 
never  ascended  to  the  altar.  In  virtue  of  this  liberty  which 
was  justly  dear  to  him,  he  contended,  in  a  dialogue  written 
at  Antioch,  against  the  heterodox  rigorism  of  Lucifer  of 
Cagliari,  the  bishop  who  had  consecrated  his  friend  Paulinus. 

Towards  380  we  meet  the  indefatigable  traveller  at  Con- 
stantinople, where  St.  Gregory  of  Nazianzus,  placed  against 
his  will  upon  the  episcopal  throne  of  that  town,  was  re- 
establishing the  true  faith  in  the  hearts  of  a  people  who  for 
forty  years  had  been  given  over  to  Arianism,  and  with  poetic 
and  touching  eloquence  was  distributing  the  treasures  of  his 
irreproachable  doctrine  among  them.  It  was  to  the  tuition 
of  such  a  master  that  Jerome  submitted  himself,  and  in 
after  years  he  took  pleasure  in  evoking  his  reminiscences  of 
him,  and  in  repeating  his  lessons. 

In  381,  Jerome  left  Constantinople  and  passing  through 
Greece  came  to  Rome. 

Jerome  arrived  in  Rome  accompanied  by  two  Eastern 
bishops,  Paulinus  to  whom  he  adhered,  and  Epiphanius  of 
Salamis.  Important  work,  illustrious  friendships,  struggles, 
and  also  bitter  trials,  awaited  him  in  the  capital  of  the  Chris- 
tian world.  At  the  Council  which  Damasus  convoked 
Jerome  gave  evidence  of  his  erudition  and  of  the  soundness 
of  his  doctrine  in  defending,  with  the  authority  of  St.  Anthan- 
asius  a  name  ascribed  to  Christ  {homo  dominicus),  the 
orthodoxy  of  which  was  contested  by  the  Apollinarists. 
The  Pope,  impressed  by  the  talent  he  was  well  fitted  to 
appreciate,  made  Jerome  his  secretary,  empowered  him  to 
reply  in  his  name  to  the  inquiries  of  the  Synods,  and  often 
referred  to  the  wisdom  of  the  learned  exegete  on  his  own 
account.     Further,  Damasus  forcibly  influenced  the  whole 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY  425 

life  of  his  collaborator.  Pope  Damasus  had  seen  Jerome's 
tendency  to  omnivorous  reading,  and  he  roused  him  from 
this  beguiling  torpor  by  urging  him  to  useful  work.  At 
his  request  Jerome  translated  two  of  Origen's  Homilies 
on  the  Song  of  Solomon,  and  began  to  translate  the  treatise 
upon  the  Holy  Ghost  by  Didymus,  the  blind  sage  of  Alex- 
andria. Was  it  St.  Ambrose's  work  on  the  same  subject 
which  Jerome  criticized  in  such  severe  terms  in  his  Preface  ? 
("Nihil  ibi  dialect  icum,  nihil  virile  at  que  districtum  .  .  .  sed 
tottim  flaccidum,  molle.  .  .  .")  Rufinus  in  his  Invectives 
pretended  that  it  was,  but  the  Benedictines  who  edited  the 
Bishop  of  Milan's  work  ,  disputed  this  assertion,  which  Tille- 
mont,  however,  seems  inclined  to  believe.  [Memoirs,  etc., 
St.  Ambrose,  note  XI.]  From  the  pen  of  such  a  censor  as 
Jerome  the  harshest  criticisms  are  by  no  means  surprising, 
and  this  was  especially  a  criticism  of  a  literary  order. 
Damasus  exacted  a  task  of  still  greater  importance  from 
Jerome.  The  Gospel  had  at  an  early  date  been  translated 
into  Latin  for  the  benefit  of  Western  Christianity,  but  the 
primitive  version,  the  ancient  Itala,  had  suffered  in  the 
manuscripts  in  circulation  corrections  and  also  innumerable 
alterations  and  additions.  Moreover,  through  the  need  of 
a  concordance,  in  order  to  make  the  copy  already  owned  as 
complete  as  possible,  the  various  narratives  of  the  Evangel- 
ists were  frequently  united  in  a  single  text.  Alarmed  at  the 
danger  introduced  by  these  divergencies,  Damasus  entreated 
Jerome  to  revise  the  New  Testament  according  to  the  orig- 
inal Greek.  Jerome,  who  was  by  nature  intolerant  of  con- 
tradiction, had  no  illusions  as  to  the  criticism  to  which  this 
task  would  expose  him.  He  was  about  to  disturb  old  ways  of 
thought,  and  possibly  startle  timid  consciences;  neverthe- 
less, strong  in  the  support  afforded  him  by  the  Pope,  he 
began  and  successfully  terminated  the  work  demanded  of 
him,  suppressed  the  interpolations,  re-established  the  invert- 
ed sequence  of  the  sacred  text,  and  presented  this  meritor- 
ious achievement  to  Damasus,  having  added  to  it  the  ten 
canons  or  tables  of  concordance  translated  from  Greek  into 
Latin,  in  which  Eusebius  of  Caesarea,  and  also  Ammonius 
of  Alexandria,  had  shown  what  was  special  to  each  Evange- 
list and  what  was  common  to  all  four. 


426  THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY 

Jerome  undertook  another  revision,  that  of  the  Psalter. 
The  translation  current  in  the  Latin  Church  had  been  made 
from  the  Greek  text  of  the  Septuagint,  but  owing  to  the 
numerous  alterations  which  had  crept  into  the  manuscript 
copies,  it  was  incorrect  in  many  places.  From  the  Hieronym- 
ian  revision  sprang  the  Psalterium  Romanum,  which  was 
in  use  in  Rome  up  to  the  reign  of  St.  Pius  V.,  and  to  which 
the  Venite  Exultemus  in  the  Invitatory  and  the  passages 
of  the  Psalms  cited  in  the  missal  still  belong.  "This  first 
work  was  in  its  turn  soon  altered  by  the  copyists,  and  at  the 
urgent  desire  of  St.  Paula,  Jerome  decided  to  make  a  second 
revision,  which  this  time  he  based  upon  Origen's  Hexapla. 
This  was  the  Psalterium  Gallicanum  (anno  389),  so  called 
because  it  was  first  adopted  in  Gaul.  .  .  .  The  Gallican 
Psalter  is  the  one  inserted  in  our  Vulgate  and  used  in  our 
Breviary."  Somewhat  later,  about  392,  he  translated  the 
Psalms  from  the  Hebrew. 

These  works,  and  the  austerity  of  Jerome's  life  while 
accomplishing  them,  drew  much  attention  upon  the  secre- 
tary of  Pope  Damasus,  and  won  him  many  illustrious  and 
priceless  friendships. 

In  a  palace  on  the  Aventine,  some  noble-hearted  women 
of  earnest  faith,  gathered  together  and  confronted  the  pag- 
anism which  was  still  general,  and  the  immorality  of  an  all 
too  large  number  of  Christians,  with  the  humble  and  cour- 
ageous exhibition  of  their  virtue.  The  mistress  of  this 
noble  dwelling  was  Marcella,  who  had  consecrated  her 
premature  and  irrevocable  widowhood  to  God,  to  the  poor, 
and  to  the  study  ©f  holy  works.  With  her  were  also  her 
mother,  Albina,  Asella,  whose  meekness  was  extolled  by 
Palladius  the  historian  of  St.  John  Chrysostom;  Furia,  the 
heiress  of  the  Camilli,  Fabiola,  who,  although  less  strong  in 
righteousness  than  her  pious  comrades,  eventually  atoned 
for  the  sins  of  her  youth  by  penance  and  charity.  Lea,  the 
widow  and  Principia. 

We  must  especially  mention  three  women  who  were  more 
cherished  by  Jerome  than  all  the  others,  and  whose  names 
are  closely  linked  with  his  in  history,  namely  Paula  and  two 
of  her  daughters,  Blesilla  and  Eustochium. 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY  427 

It  is  unnecessary  here  to  give  an  account  of  Paula's  early 
history.  By  her  mother  she  was  authentically  connected 
with  the  Scipios  and  the  Gracchi,  and  her  father,  Rogatus,  a 
wealthy  proprietor  of  Nicopolis,  claimed  descent  from  Aga- 
memnon, the  king  of  kings.  At  the  age  of  thirty-five,  after 
the  death  of  her  husband,  Julius  Toxotius,  a  reputed  descen- 
dant of  ^neas,  for  in  the  genealogy  of  patrician  Rome  legend 
blends  easily  with  history,  Paula  was  inspired  by  Marcella's 
example  to  adopt  the  ascetic  life,  in  which  she  soon  equalled 
her  heroic  friend.  Her  eldest  daughter,  Blesilla,  left  a  widow 
after  seven  months  of  marriage,  re-entered  the  narrow  path 
from  which  the  world  had  momentarily  tempted  her,  and 
died  in  the  flower  of  her  youth,  lamented  in  pathetic  accents 
by  Jerome. 

Eustochium,  another  of  Paula's  daughters,  was  reserved 
for  a  longer  career  than  Blesilla,  the  tenderly-mourned.  She 
followed  her  mother  to  the  East,  where  she  succeeded  her  in 
the  direction  of  the  convents  in  Palestine,  and,  always  calm, 
always  invincible  to  temptation,  she  retained  Jerome  as 
consoler  and  guide  until  the  end. 

The  love  of  the  Scriptures  glowed  in  the  hearts  of  these 
Christian  women  who,  in  order  to  acquire  a  deeper  knowl- 
edge of  the  holy  books,  resolutely  began  the  study  of  Greek 
and  Hebrew.  In  these  researches,  where  the  knowledge  of 
truth  and  not  the  elusive  joys  of  vainglory  were  sought,  they 
were  directed  by  Jerome ;  and  Marcella,  whose  guest  he  had 
become,  outstripped  all  her  companions  in  this  arduous  pur- 
suit. Later  on,  the  recluse  of  Bethlehem,  in  his  "Commen- 
tary on  the  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians, ' '  wrote  of  her :  '  'When- 
ever I  picture  to  myself  her  ardor  for  study,  her  vivacity 
of  mind  and  her  application,  I  blame  my  idleness,  I  who, 
retreated  in  this  wilderness,  with  the  manger  whither  the 
shepherds  came  in  haste  to  adore  the  wailing  Christ-child 
constantly  before  mine  eyes,  am  unable  to  accomplish  what 
a  noble  woman  accomplishes  in  the  hour  she  snatches  from 
the  cares  of  a  large  circle  and  the  government  of  her  house- 
hold." 

Jerome  was  reproached  for  teaching  only  women.  He 
answered  what  too  often,  alas,  the  priest  of  the  present  day 


428  THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY 

would  have  the  right  to  reply :  "If  men  questioned  me  more 
about  the  Scriptures  I  would  speak  less  to  women."  He 
added:  "I  rejoice,  I  am  filled  with  enthusiasm,  when  in 
Babylon  I  meet  Daniel,  Ananias,  Azarias,  and  Misael." 
[Epist.  LXV.  ad  Principiam  virginem,  2.]  He  found  Daniel, 
Ananias,  Azarias,  and  Misael  in  a  few  chosen  friends  who 
frequented  the  Aventine  and  attended  the  religious  school. 
They  were  Pammachius,  Marcella's  cousin,  who  was  to  marry 
Paulina,  Paula's  second  daughter;  Oceanus,  a  learned  man 
who  later  visited  Jerome  at  Bethlehem ;  Marcellinus,  who  in 
Africa,  in  the  time  of  Augustine,  was  the  most  conscientious 
of  magistrates;  and  Domnion,  a  priest  advanced  in  years, 
the  praises  of  whose  charity  were  sung  by  all. 

In  spite  of  the  austere  sweetness  of  these  friendships,  in 
spite  of  the  substantial  support  which  the  protection  of 
Damasus  secured  for  him,  Jerome  did  not  taste  peace  in 
Rome.  Was  peace,  however,  what  he  sought?  Jerome 
surely  did  not  shrink  from  contention.  He  had  defended 
the  incomparable  benefits  of  perfect  chastity  against  Helvid- 
ius,  a  contemner  of  the  dogma  of  the  perpetual  virginity 
of  Mary,  and,  without  denying  the  legitimacy  of  marriage, 
he  pointed  out  its  drawbacks,  I  was  about  to  say  its  evils. 
He  encouraged  young  girls,  for  whom  honorable  or  brilliant 
marriages  were  in  contemplation,  in  their  desire  to  lead  a 
monastic  life,  and  at  the  sight  of  the  Roman  virgins  who, 
through  his  advice,  thus  renounced  their  families,  there  were 
many  who  would  readily  have  accused  him  of  murder,  more 
especially  after  the  death  of  Blesilla,  whom  he  was  reported 
to  have  killed  by  dint  of  the  fasts  he  imposed  upon  her. 
That  was  not  the  only  grudge  harbored  against  him.  He 
denounced  with  eloquent  indignation  and  inexhaustible  fer- 
vor the  licentiousness,  avarice,  intemperance  and  hypocrisy 
which  had  crept  in  among  the  priests  and  the  monks  at  Rome 
and  it  may  easily  be  imagined  that  those  stung  by  his  power- 
ful satire,  and  those  who  recognized  themselves  or  were 
recognized  by  others  in  his  portraits,  became  incensed,  and 
that  anger  and  resentment  broke  out  against  him  on  every 
side.  Calumny  soon  came  to  the  aid  of  spite,  and  at  the 
expense  of  all  justice  as  well  as  truth  the  relations  between 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY  429 

Paula  and  her  spiritual  director  were  incriminated.  The 
death  of  Damasus,  which  took  place  on  the  i  ith  of  Decem- 
ber 384,  deprived  Jerome  of  his  protector,  excluded  him 
from  the  Apostolic  Chancery,  and  completed  his  severance 
from  Rome.  His  thoughts  turned  once  more  to  the  desert, 
but  this  time  it  was  the  Biblical  desert  in  which  he  wished 
permanently  to  establish  himself,  and  he  left  Rome  forever, 
taking  with  him  his  brother  Paulinian,  the  priest  Vincent, 
and  a  few  monks.  From  Ostia,  on  the  point  of  embarking, 
he  wrote  a  letter  to  Asella,  in  which  his  affectionate  and 
saddened  soul  reveals  itself.  "If  I  believed  myself  capable 
of  thanking  thee  worthily,"  he  wrote,  *'I  should  be  incensed. 
But  God  can  reward  thy  saintly  soul  for  me  for  the  good 
thou  has  done  me.  As  to  me,  I  am  unworthy  of  it,  and  I 
never  had  any  right  to  hope  or  even  to  wish  that  thou  would- 
est  grant  me  in  Jesus  Christ  so  great  an  affection.  And  even 
if  certain  persons  believe  me  to  be  a  vile  wretch  overwhelmed 
by  the  weight  of  my  sins  — in  comparison  to  my  sins  that  is 
but  little — yet  thou  art  right  in  letting  thy  heart  distinguish 
for  thee  between  the  righteous  and  the  unrighteous.  ..." 
Jerome  then  proceeded  to  exonerate  himself  from  the  calum- 
nies which  had  assailed  him  and  invoked  the  memory  and 
testimony  of  Asella  and  of  all  those  who  lived  on  the  Aven- 
tine.  "Many  a  time  have  I  been  surrounded  by  a  flock  of 
virgins,  and  to  the  best  of  my  ability  expounded  the  divine 
books  to  several  of  them.  Study  creates  assiduity,  assiduity 
familiarity,  and  familiarity  a  mutual  understanding.  Call 
upon  those  virgins  to  answer  if  they  have  ever  had  any 
thought  from  me  other  than  those  one  should  receive  from  a 
Christian.  Have  I  ever  taken  money  from  any  of  them? 
Have  I  not  always  repulsed  every  gift  large  or  small  ?  Has 
my  neighbor's  lucre  ever  soiled  my  hand?  Have  I  ever 
uttered  a  dubious  word  or  cast  too  bold  a  glance?" 

Jerome  journeyed  to  Rhegium  thence  to  Cyprus,  and 
thence  to  Antioch;  St.  Paula  leaving  Rome  forever  joined 
him  here.  She  brought  with  her  her  daughter  Eustochium  • 
and  a  band  of  Roman  virgins  who  had  consecrated  them- 
selves to  God.  In  the  middle  of  winter  St.  Jerome  and  St. 
Paula  and  her  companions  set  out  for  the  Holy  Land. 


430  THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY 

In  praef.  2  ad  Paralip.  he  describes  the  finis  of  this  jour- 
ney: ''As  those  who  have  seen  Athens  better  understand 
Grecian  history;  and  as  he,  who  has  traveled  from  Troas 
through  Leucadia  and  the  Acroceraunian  mountains  to 
Sicily,  and  thence  to  the  mouth  of  the  Tiber,  will  better 
understand  the  third  book  of  Virgil,  thus  a  man  will  more 
clearly  understand  the  Scriptures,  if  he  shall  have  seen  Judasa 
with  his  own  eyes,  and  shall  have  examined  the  memorials 
of  the  old  cities,  and  the  names  of  places  whether  unchanged 
or  changed.  Hence  we  took  the  pains  to  undergo  this  labor 
with  most  learned  Hebrews,  that  we  might  journey  through 
the  country  of  which  all  the  churches  of  Christ  speak.  Com- 
ing to  Csesarea,  Jerome  came  upon  the  Hexapla  of  Origen, 
and  from  this  copied  all  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament. 
He  descended  into  Egypt  and  listened  at  Alexandria  to 
Didymus,  the  celebrated  teacher  of  Scripture:  "My  head 
was  now  sprinkled  with  gray  hairs,"  he  says,  "  and  seemed 
more  fit  for  the  master  than  the  disciple ;  but  I  went  to  Alex- 
andria, I  heard  Didymus,  and  for  many  things,  am  thankful 
to  him." 

Jerome  now  returned  to  Palestine  and  established  himself 
at  Bethlehem,  where,  out  of  the  wreck  of  his  inheritance,  con- 
sisting of  farms  partially  destroyed  by  the  barbarians,  which 
Paulinian  was  commissioned  to  sell,  and  with  the  aid  of 
Paula's  bounty,  he  erected  a  monastery  which  he  fortified  with 
a  tower  of  refuge.  He  selected  for  his  cell  a  cave  close  to  the 
one  where  our  Lord  was  bom.  Paula,  meanwhile,  after 
having  built  some  temporary  cells,  was  engaged  in  construct- 
ing convents,  and  her  indefatigable  charity  endowed  as  a 
hospice  for  pilgrims  the  hamlet  where,  as  Jerome  observed, 
Mary  and  Joseph  had  been  without  shelter. 

In  Palestine  Jerome  was  once  more  thrown  with  Rufinus, 
a  friend  of  his  youth,  who  had  left  Rome  in  371  and  after 
six  years  spent  in  Egypt  had  settled  at  Jerusalem  not  far 
from  the  widow  Melania,  celebrated  for  her  austere  sacrifices 
and  her  continual  journeys.  The  intimacy  which  absence 
had  interrupted  without  destroying,  was  renewed  between 
the  two  friends.  Jerome  used  even  to  have  the  manuscripts 
of  secular  literature  needed  for  his  disciples  copied  by  monks 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY  431 

belonging  to  the  convent  of  the  OHve  Trees,  which  Rufinus 
directed. 

The  early  days  of  Jerome's  sojourn  in  Bethlehem  were 
most  serene;  everything  charmed  and  satisfied  him,  and  a 
tremor  of  joyous  admiration,  a  breath  of  spring,  one  might 
almost  say,  seems  to  vibrate  through  the  pages  which  he 
wrote  or  inspired  during  that  period.  'The  most  illustrious 
Gauls  congregate  here,  and  no  sooner  has  the  Briton,  so 
remote  from  our  world,  made  any  progress  in  piety,  than  he 
abandons  his  early  setting  sun  to  seek  a  land  which  he  knows 
only  by  reputation,  and  through  the  Scriptures.  And  what . 
of  the  Armenians,  the  Persians,  the  nations  of  India  and 
Ethiopia;  of  Egypt  herself,  so  rich  in  monks,  of  Pontus, 
Cappadocia,  Coelesyria  and  Mesopotamia?  All  these  East- 
em  countries  send  us  hordes  of  monks  .  .  .  they  throng 
here  and  set  us  the  example  of  every  virtue.  The  languages 
differ,  but  the  religion  is  the  same,  and  one  can  count  as 
many  different  choirs  singing  the  psalms  as  there  are  nations. 
Yet  in  all  this — and  this  is  the  triumph  of  Christianity — 
there  is  no  vainglory,  none  prides  himself  upon  his  chastity ; 
if  they  quarrel  it  is  as  to  who  shall  be  the  humblest,  for  the 
last  is  here  counted  first.  .  .  They  do  not  judge  one  another, 
for  fear  of  being  judged  by  the  Saviour,  and  slander,  so  prev- 
alent in  many  districts  where  they  malign  each  other  out- 
rageously, is  here  completely  unknown.  Here  is  no  luxury, 
no  sensuality.  ..."  Either  Jerome  or  Paula  closes  this 
description  with  a  few  lines  of  idyllic  grace.  'Tn  this  land 
of  Christ's  all  is  simplicity,  and  except  when  the  Psalms  are 
being  sung  all  is  silence.  Wherever  you  may  go  you  hear 
the  laborer,  with  his  hand  upon  the  plough,  murmuring 
Alleluia.  The  reaper,  with  the  sweat  pouring  from  his  brow, 
finds  relaxation  in  singing  the  Psalms,  and  the  vintager 
recites  some  passage  from  David  while  pruning  his  vines. 
They  are,  so  to  speak,  the  love  songs  of  the  country;  the 
shepherds'  lilt,  the  laborers'  accompaniment."  [Epist. 
XLVI. — Paulae  et  Eustochii  ad  Marcellam,  9,  10,  11.] 

These  peaceful  years  were  also  years  of  toil  for  Jerome. 
The  direction  of  the  convents  which  had  sprung  up  about 
the  cave  of  Bethlehem,  the  active  correspondence  he  main- 


432  THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY 

tained  with  his  friends  in  the  outer  world,  even  the  gram- 
matical instruction  he  gave  to  the  young  men,  which  brought 
back  to  him  those  secular  works  of  antiquity  he  had  vainly 
striven  to  hate  or  to  forget,  would  have  been  sufficient  in 
themselves  to  fill  his  life.  They  were,  however,  but  a  minor 
portion  of  his  work.  He  had  undertaken  the  study  of  the 
Scriptures  at  the  advice  of  Damasus,  but  the  Providential 
attraction  which  also  drew  him  to  them,  was  continually 
stronger  and  surer.  Everything  seemed  to  lead  him  to  the 
Bible. 

Sulpicius  Severus,  who  spent  six  months  with  him  at 
Bethlehem,  thus  describes  his  life:  "He  is  wholly  absorbed 
in  reading,  he  takes  no  rest  by  day  or  by  night;  he  is  ever 
reading  or  writing  something."  Jerome  was  a  man  of  great 
physical  endurance.  His  literary  activity  at  Bethlehem 
may  be  compared  to  that  of  Origen.  He  translated  the 
book  of  Tobias  in  a  single  night,  and  even,  when  ill,  he  dic- 
tated from  his  couch  to  an  amanuensis. 

To  perfect  his  knowledge  of  Hebrew,  he  employed  a  Jew 
to  teach  him,  and,  as  this  preceptor  feared  the  fanaticism  of 
his  race,  the  lessons  were  given  by  night.  Jerome  speaks  of 
these  things  in  his  Epist.  ad  Pammachius,  84,  3:  ''With 
most  great  labor,  and  great  price  did  I  have  Baranina  by 
night  as  preceptor.  He  feared  the  Jews,  and  was  to  me 
another  Nicodemus."  Coupled  with  this,  he  assiduously 
studied  the  Fathers  and  writers  of  the  Church.  Villarsi 
declares  that  no  one,  Greek  or  Latin,  read  more  authors 
than  Jerome.  In  the  year  389  Jerome  began  the  great  work 
of  his  life,  a  translation  of  the  protocanonical  books  of  the 
Old  Testament  from  the  original  Hebrew.  He  was  not 
able  to  devote  all  his  time  to  the  great  work,  but  it  was  the 
chief  object  of  his  labors  for  fifteen  years.  He  also  trans- 
lated the  deuterocanonical  books  of  Tobias  and  Judith  from 
Chaldean  exemplars.  This  translation  of  Jerome  forms  our 
Vulgate,  concerning  which  we  shall  speak  later.  His  trans- 
lation of  the  Psalter  from  the  Hebrew  was  not  received  into 
the  Vulgate ;  its  place  was  occupied  by  the  Psalter  which  he 
revised  from  the  Hexaplar  text  of  Origen  at  Csesarea. 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY  433 

A  long  and  painful  ordeal  was  about  to  disturb  what  St. 
Augustine  called  **the  peaceful  joy"  which  Jerome  tasted  in 
his  work.  It  arose  from  the  most  unexpected  quarter,  his 
adversary  being  no  other  than  Rufinus,  with  whom  he  en- 
gaged in  a  fratricidal  conflict  over  the  writings  of  Origen. 

Jerome  had  first  met  Rufinus  at  Aquileia,  and  they  had 
contracted  one  of  those  friendships  which  seem  eternal.  It 
was  to  this  friend  of  his  youth,  who  had  left  him  to  visit  the 
Egyptian  Thebaides,  that  Jerome,  isolated  in  the  desert  of 
Chalcis,  wrote  from  a  bed  of  sickness:  "Oh!  if  the  Lord 
Jesus  Christ  would  grant  that  I  might  suddenly  be  trans- 
ported to  thy  side  as  was  Philip  to  the  minister  of  Candacia, 
and  Habakkuk  to  Daniel,  how  tenderly  would  I  clasp  thee 
in  my  arms!"  He  closed  this  letter  with  the  following 
words,  which  subsequent  events  so  cruelly  belied:  "I 
beseech  thee,  let  not  thy  heart  lose  sight,  as  have  thine  eyes, 
of  a  friend  so  long  sought,  with  such  difficulty  found,  and  so 
hard  to  retain !  Let  others  gloat  over  their  gold !  Friend- 
ship is  an  incomparable  possession,  a  priceless  treasure,  but 
the  friendship  which  can  perish  has  never  been  a  true  one." 
[Epist.  III.  ad  Rufinum  monachum.] 

This  last  is  a  somewhat  bold  assertion,  and  one  which 
fails  to  take  into  account  the  inconstancy  of  the  human  heart 
which  is  liable  to  take  back  what  it  once  gave  in  all  sincerity. 
St.  Augustine,  who  was  the  most  devoted  and  faithful  of 
friends,  the  mere  mention  of  whose  name  recalls  those  of  so 
many  beings  dear  to  him  whose  lives  were  inseparably  inter- 
woven with  his  own,  in  speaking  of  this  rupture  between 
Rufinus  and  Jerome  has  deplored  in  touching  accents  the 
frailty  which  undermines  or  menaces  our  affections.  *  'What 
hearts  will  hereafter  dare  open  themselves  to  one  another;  is 
there  any  friend  to  whom  one  may  freely  unbosom  oneself; 
where  is  the  friend  one  does  not  fear  some  day  to  count  an 
enemy,  if  this  rupture  which  we  deplore  could  have  taken 
place  between  Jerome  and  Rufinus?  Oh!  wretched  plight 
of  mankind,  and  worthy  of  pity!  How  can  we  put  faith 
in  what  we  see  in  our  friend's  souls  when  we  cannot  foresee 
what  may  change  them?  Yet  why  lament  thus  over  others 
when  we  do  not  know  what  we  may  be  ourselves?     Man 

(28)  H.  S. 


434  THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY 

barely  and  imperfectly  knows  what  he  is  to-day;  he  has  no 
conception  of  what  he  may  be  to-morrow."  [Epist,  CX. 
inter  Epist.  Hieronymi,  6.] 

A  famous  writing  of  Origen's  gave  rise  to  a  stormy  quarrel 
and  an  irrevocable  rupture  between  the  two  friends.  It 
was  curious  that  the  timid  writer,  who  took  exception  to  the 
most  legitimate  of  Jerome's  innovations  and  behind  whose 
watchful  orthodoxy  lurked  a  conservative  and  moody  spirit 
of  distrust,  should  have  been  the  champion  of  the  brilliant 
and  audacious  Alexandrian,  who  seems  to  us  one  of  the  most 
dazzling  and  in  certain  respects  one  of  the  most  sympathetic 
personalities  of  the  Christian  school  of  x^lexandria. 

Jgrome  had  proclaimed  Origen  the  master  of  the  Churches 
after  the  apostles.  But  he  tells  us  that  he  praised  Origen  as  an 
interpreter,  not  as  a  dogmatist.  [Epist.  LXXXIV  ad  Pam.] 
This  is  an  awkward  apology.  A  false  dogmatist  can  not  be 
a  good  interpreter  The  fact  of  the  matter  seems  to  be  that 
Jerome  himself  was  deceived  by  the  views  of  Origen.  The 
vehemence  and  intolerance  of  Jerome's  nature  can  be 
gleaned  from  the  following  passage,  Epist.  XXXIII.  4.  It 
was  written  concerning  the  condemnation  of  Origen :  "Rome 
consents  to  his  condemnation;  it  brings  together  its  senate 
against  him,  not  because  of  the  novelty  of  his  doctrines,  not 
because  of  heresy,  as  the  dogs  who  are  mad  against  him  now 
pretend,  but  because  they  could  not  bear  the  glory  of  his 
eloquence  and  his  knowledge,  and  because  when  he  spoke 
they  were  made  to  appear  as  mutes." 

A  few  years  later  he  abused  Rufinus  in  a  similar  manner 
because  he  sustained  the  defense  of  Origen.  Like  violent 
changes  of  opinion  characterize  his  whole  life.  His  judg- 
ments are  not  uniform  and  consistent,  and  this  is  to  be  taken 
into  account  when  adducing  him  as  an  authority. 

Rufinus  died  in  Sicily  in  410,  and  Jerome  thus  speaks  of 
his  death  in  the  opening  chapter  of  his  Commentary  on 
Ezechiel:  'The  scorpion  lies  underground  between  Encel- 
adus  and  Porphyrion,  and  the  hydra  of  many  heads  has  at 
last  ceased  to  hiss  against  me."  **Tantaene  animis  coelesti- 
busiras?  " 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY  435 

Rufinus  also  was  a  bitter  foe.     Anyone  who  has  read  his 
Apology,  his  ''Invectives  against  Jerome,"  for  such  is  the 
name  which  has  clung  to  this  work,  will  be  fully  persuaded 
of   this.      "He  devoted  three  years  to  this  work,"    says 
Amedee  Thierry,  "which  appeared  fragment  by  fragment ; 
he  divided  it  into  two  books  to  which  he  later  added  a  supple- 
ment.    He  had  a  double  aim,  first  to  exonerate  himself  from 
the  crime  of  heresy  by  casting  upon  Jerome  the  accusation 
directed  towards  himself,  and  then  to  dishonor  Jerome  and 
to  throw  odium  on  his  name  by  personal  imputations,  lament- 
ing the  while  being  forced  to  such  measures."     [St.  Jerome, 
Lib.  IV.]     Indeed  no  pamphlet  has  ever  been  composed  with 
more  cunning  hatred,  nor  has  ever  struck  the  adversary  more 
surely.     According  to  him,  Jerome  was  the  enemy  of  man- 
kind; a  traducer  of  the  faithful,  whose  customs  he  had 
calumniated  in  his  book  upon  Virginity,  at  the  risk  of  justify- 
ing and  even  magnifying  the  calumnies  of  the  pagans;  a 
traducer    of    the    works  of  Ambrose   the  great  bishop;  a 
traducer  of  Rome,  the  capital  of  the  Christian  world;  and  a 
traducer  of  all  authors,  either  Greek  or  Latin,  who  had  pre- 
ceded him.     One  grievance  which  Rufinus  put  forward  with 
malignant  insistence,  was  the  important  part  the  pagan 
authors  played  in  Jerome's  works  and  in  his  thoughts.     In 
vain  had  Jerome  after  a  famous  vision  sworn  never  to  reopen 
any  secular  book.    "Peruse  his  writings  and  see  if  there  is  a 
single  page  which  does  not  point  to  his  having  again  become 
a  Ciceronian,  and  in  which  he  does  not  speak  of  'Our  Cicero,' 
'Our  Homer,'  'Our  Virgil' ;  he  even  boasts  of  having  read  the 
works  of  Pythagoras,  which  according  to  the  erudite  are  no 
longer  in  existence.     In  almost  all  his  works  quotations 
from  secular  authors  are  far  more  numerous  and  lengthy 
than  those  from  the  Prophets  and  Apostles.     Even  when 
writing  to  women  or  maidens,  who  in  our  holy  books  seek 
only  subjects  for  edification,  he  intersperses  his  letters  with 
quotations  from  Horace,  Cicero  or  Virgil."     [Rufinus  Apol. 
Lib.  sec.  7.] 

A  controversy  arose  between  St.  Jerome  and  St.  Augus- 
tine between  the  years  395  and  405.  The  origin  of  the  con- 
troversy was  St.  Jerome's  commentary  of  Galatians  II- 
1 1 — 14. 


436  THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY 

"I  have  read,"  Augustine  wrote  Jerome,  ''a  commentary 
upon  the  Epistles  of  St.  Paul  which  is  ascribed  to  you,  and  I 
came  across  the  passage  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Galatians, 
where  the  Apostle  Peter  is  reproved  for  the  deception  into 
which  he  had  been  drawn.  I  confess  with  no  small  sorrow 
that  in  it  you,  even  you,  or  the  author  of  this  writing  who- 
soever he  may  be,  have  defended  the  cause  of  untruth.  I 
consider  it  a  fatal  error  to  believe  it  possible  to  find  any- 
thing in  the  Scriptures  which  is  untrue,  in  other  words,  to 
believe  that  the  men  to  whom  we  are  indebted  for  the  sacred 
works  could  have  inserted  therein  any  falsehood.  Once 
admit  any  officious  untruth  in  the  Holy  books,  then,  in 
accordance  with  this  pernicious  principle,  in  order  to  escape 
from  a  moral  which  imposes  too  much  restraint  upon  us,  or 
from  dogmas  which  are  beyond  our  comprehension,  we  may 
attribute  any  part  of  these  works  to  the  artifice  of  an  author 
who  has  not  told  the  truth."  Having  pursued  his  urgent 
argument  pointed  by  illustrations  from  the  Bible,  Augustine, 
scarcely  hoping  that  his  request  would  be  acceded  to,  de- 
manded an  explanation  which  would  dispel  his  doubts.  In 
conclusion  he  claimed  a  fraternally  severe  criticism  of  which 
he  had  just  given  an  example,  for  those  of  his  works  which 
Profuturus  was  to  offer  to  Jerome. 

Meanwhile  Profuturus,  who  had  been  made  Bishop  of 
Cirta  in  Numidia,  instead  of  starting  for  Palestine  took 
possession  of  his  see,  where  he  very  shortly  died.  The 
letter,  therefore,  which  had  been  given  to  him  never  reached 
its  destination,  but  unfortunately  fell  into  indiscreet  hands, 
and  the  copies  of  it  which  were  circulated  in  Dalmatia  and 
Italy,  encouraged  Jerome's  enemies  in  their  criticisms. 
Augustine  had  also  been  raised  to  the  episcopacy  in  395, 
and  amid  new  cares  and  duties  had  no  doubt  forgotten  not 
only  his  letter,  but  the  commentary  which  had  provoked  it, 
when  a  note  which  the  deacon  Presidius  brought  him  from 
Jerome,  recalled  them  to  his  mind.  As  Jerome's  missive 
did  not  in  any  way  answer  the  questions  Augustine  had  put 
to  him,  the  latter  thinking  that  his  letter  had  gone  astray 
wrote  another,  which  was  longer  but  not  less  peremptory  and 
no  less  aggressive.     After  having  again  tried  to  demonstrate 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY  437 

the  dangers  of  the  Hieronymian  explanation,  Augustine 
exhorted  the  aged  historian  to  a  courageous  retraction  of  it, 
reminding  him  of  the  fable  of  Stesichorus  who,  struck  with 
blindness  by  the  demi-gods  Castor  and  Pollux  for  having 
decried  the  chastity  and  beauty  of  Helen  in  a  satire,  did  not 
recover  his  sight  until  he  had  sung  the  praises  of  the  grace 
and  virtue  he  had  outraged,  upon  his  lyre. 

'*I  implore  you,"  he  wrote  Jerome,  *'gird  yourself  with  a 
sincere  and  Christian  severity,  correct  and  amend  your  work, 
and  so  to  speak  sing  its  recantation.  The  truth  of  Chris- 
tians is  incomparably  more  beautiful  than  the  Helen  of  the 
Greeks,  for  it  indeed,  have  our  martyrs  fought  more  bravely 
against  the  Sodom  of  their  century,  than  did  the  Greek 
heroes  against  Troy.  I  do  not  urge  you  to  this  disavowal, 
so  that  you  may  recover  your  mental  sight,  for  God  forbid 
that  I  should  think  that  you  had  lost  it,  yet  suffer  me  to  tell 
you  that  through  I  know  not  what  inadvertency  you  have 
turned  aside  your  eyes,  sound  and  far-sighted  though  they 
may  be,  and  have  failed  to  see  the  disastrous  consequences 
of  a  system  which  would  admit  that  one  of  the  authors  of 
our  sacred  books,  could  once,  in  some  part  of  his  work,  have 
conscientiously  and  piously  lied."  [Epist.  LXVII.  Augus- 
tini  ad  Hieronymum,  inter  Epistolas  Hieronymi,  7.] 

The  man,  by  name  Paul,  to  whom  this  letter  had  been 
confided,  overcome  by  his  terror  of  the  sea,  did  not  embark 
for  Palestine,  and  another  messenger  chosen  by  Augustine 
also  failed  to  deliver  the  missive  to  Jerome.  The  letter, 
however,  spread  abroad,  and  with  it  a  report  that  Augustine 
had  composed  and  sent  to  Rome  a  book  against  Jerome. 
The  deacon  Sisinius,  a  friend  of  the  hermit,  found  Augus- 
tine's letter,  together  with  some  other  writings  by  the  same 
doctor,  on  an  island  in  the  Adriatic,  and  lost  no  time  in 
sending  it  to  its  destination. 

This  certainly  was  enough  to  rouse  a  soul  less  ardent,  and  a 
writer  less  harassed  by  envy,  or  less  surrounded  by  admirers 
quick  to  take  alarm  and  even  to  be  angered  at  all  criticisms 
directed  against  their  master ;  yet  Jerome  controlled  himself 
and  refrained  from  answering.  He  explained  his  silence  in 
the  letters  which  later  he  wrote  to  the  Bishop  of  Hippo.     It 


438  THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY 

seems  that,  although  he  unmistakably  recognized  Augus- 
tine's familiar  style  and  manner  of  argument,  the  material 
evidences  of  authenticity  were  wanting.  Besides  which,  the 
veteran  soldier  of  orthodoxy  shrank  from  opening  hostilities 
with  a  bishop  of  his  own  communion  whom  he  had  loved 
before  even  knowing  him,  and  who  had  sought  him  in  friend- 
ship; one,  who  already  illustrious,  was  to  continue  his  Scrip- 
tural works,  and  one  in  whom  he  gladly  welcomed  a  legiti- 
mate heir. 

When  at  last  Augustine  heard  of  the  pain  his  letters, 
divulged  in  such  an  unaccountable  manner,  had  caused  in 
the  solitude  of  Bethlehem,  he  wrote  to  Jerome:     ''A  rumor 
has  reached  me  which  I  have  difhculty  in  believing,  yet  why 
should  I  not  mention  it  to  you  ?     It  has  been  reported  to  me 
that  some  brothers,  I  know  not  whom,  have  given  you  to 
understand  that  I  have  written  a  book  against  you,  and  that 
I  have  sent  it  to  Rome.     Rest  assured  that  this  is  false ;  God 
is  witness  that  I  have  written  no  book  against  you"  (the 
book  in  question  was  the  letter,  or  letters,  of  which  Jerome's 
enemies  had  taken  a  perfidious  advantage).     *'If  there  be 
anything  in  my  works  contrary  to  your  views,  know  or  believe 
that  it  was  written  not  to  antagonize  you,  but  to  explain 
what  seemed  to  me  the  truth.     Point  out  to  me  anything  in 
my  writings  which  could  offend  you;  I  will  receive  your 
counsels  as  from  one  brother  to  another,  glad  to  make  any 
corrections,  glad  also  of  such  a  token  of  your  affection.     I  ask 
and  entreat  this  of  you."     Then  followed  one  of  those  effu- 
sions in  which  Augustine's  soul  so  often  found  its  outlet. 
"Oh,  why,  if  I  may  not  live  with  you,  may  I  not  at  least  live 
in  your  vicinity,  and  hold  sweet  and  frequent  intercourse 
with  you.     But  since  that  has  not  been  granted  me,  consent 
at  least  to  uphold  and  draw  closer  the  ties  which  render  us 
present  to  one  another  in  the  Lord;  disdain  not  the  letters 
which  I  will  sometimes  write  you."     [Ep.  ci.  Augustini  ad 
Hieronymum,  2,  3.] 

Sincere  and  touching  as  were  the  tones  of  this  letter,  it 
failed  to  disarm  Jerome,  who  did  not  think  it  sufficiently 
explicit.  Moreover  the  advice,  and  even  the  appeals,  which 
it  contained  offended  the  somewhat  proud  susceptibility  of 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY  439 

the  aged  Biblical  student.  After  evincing  his  doubts,  which 
we  have  already  mentioned,  upon  the  authenticity  of  Augus- 
tine's letter,  he  proceeded  to  add  these  words :  "God  forbid 
that  I  should  dare  to  censure  the  works  of  your  Beatitude ; 
let  it  suffice  me  to  defend  my  own,  without  criticising  those 
of  others.  Your  wisdom  knows  full  well  that  every  man  is 
wedded  to  his  own  opinion,  and  that  it  were  childish  boasting 
to  imitate  the  youths  of  old  who,  by  slandering  famous  men, 
sought  to  become  famous  themselves.  Neither  am  I  foolish 
enough  to  be  offended  by  the  divergences  which  exist 
between  your  explanation  and  mine.  You  yourself  are  not 
hurt  at  my  holding  different  opinions.  But  where  our 
friends  have  really  the  right  to  reprove  us  is  when  not  per- 
ceiving our  own  wallet,  as  Persius  says,  we  look  at  that  of 
another. 

''I  have  still  one  thing  to  ask  of  you,  which  is  that  you 
should  love  one  who  loves  you,  and  that  being  young,  you 
challenge  not  an  aged  man  upon  the  battlefield  of  the  Scrip- 
tures. We  too  have  had  our  day,  and  we  have  run  our  race 
to  the  best  of  our  abilities,  and  now  that  it  has  come  to  be 
your  turn  to  do  likewise,  and  that  you  are  making  great 
strides,  we  have  a  right  to  rest.  To  follow  your  example  in 
quoting  the  poets,  remember  Dares  and  Entellus,  think  also 
of  the  proverb  which  says,  'As  the  ox  grows  weary  he  plants 
his  foot  more  firmly.'  I  dictate  these  lines  with  sadness; 
would  to  God  I  might  embrace  you,  and  that  in  brotherly 
intercourse  we  might  have  instructed  one  another.  .  .  . 
Think  of  me,  saintly  and  venerable  pontiff!  See  how  much 
I  love  you,  I  who,  although  challenged,  have  been  unwilling 
to  reply,  and  who  do  not  yet  resign  myself  to  ascribe  to 
you  what  in  another  I  should  blame." 

To  this  letter,  which  was  brought  him  by  the  subdeacon 
Asterius,  Augustine  made  a  modest  and  touching  answer. 
He  vindicated  himself  of  having,  so  to  speak,  defied  the  aged 
athlete  upon  the  field  of  the  Scriptures,  and  merely  asked  to 
be  enlightened.  "Far  be  it  from  me  that  I-  should  take 
offence,  if  by  sound  reasons  you  will  and  can  prove  to  me  that 
you  understand  the  Epistle  to  the  Galatians  or  any  other  like 
part  of  the  Scriptures  better  than  I.     Far  from  resenting  it,  I 


440  THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY 

should  deem  it  a  privilege  to  be  instructed  or  corrected  by 
you.  But,  beloved  brother,  you  would  not  think  that  your 
answer  could  have  hurt  me  had  you  not  thought  that  I  had 
been  the  first  to  wound  you.  My  best  course  is  to  acknowl- 
edge my  fault,  and  to  confess  that  I  offended  you  in  writing 
that  letter  which  I  cannot  disown.  If  I  offended  you,  I  con- 
jure you  by  the  meekness  of  Jesus  Christ  do  not  render  me 
evil  for  evil  by  offending  me  in  your  turn.  Now,  to  dissimu- 
late what  you  find  to  alter  or  correct  in  my  writings  or  my 
discourses  would  be  to  offend  me.  .  .  .  Reprove  me  with 
charity  if  you  deem  me  in  the  wrong,  innocent  though  I  may 
be,  or  treat  me  with  the  tenderness  of  a  father  if  you  think 
me  worthy  of  your  affection.  .  .  .  Innocent,  I  will  receive 
your  reproaches  in  a  spirit  of  gratitude ;  guilty,  I  will  acknowl- 
edge both  your  benevolence  and  my  own  error." 

The  unbiased  judge  of  this  controversy  must  feel  that  St. 
Augustine  was  entirely  right  in  his  criticism  and  that  Augus- 
tine's magnanimity  and  meekness  prevented  a  bitter  contro- 
versy. St.  Jerome  manifests  here  that  sensitiveness  to 
crticism  which  was  a  prominent  characteristic  in  him.  Jerome 
died  at  Bethlehem,  according  to  the  Chronicle  of  Prosper, 
in  the  year  420,  and  was  interred  close  to  the  Grotto  of  the 
Nativity  of  Our  Saviour.  His  body  was  afterwards  brought 
to  the  Church  of  St.  Maria  Maggiore  in  Rome. 

His  sanctity  and  austerity  is  of  the  kind  that  awes  rather 
than  attracts,  and  is  provocative  of  admiration  rather  than 
of  imitation.  For  this  reason  he  has  been  looked  at  with 
cool,  temperate  eyes;  and  since,  moreover,  he  has  so  fully 
written  himself  down  for  us,  there  is  little  difficulty  in  dis- 
cerning the  broad  outlines  of  his  personality. 

A  strange,  strong  man,  strenuous  and  intense  even  to  the 
verge  of  ferocity,  as  was  the  fashion  of  his  day  with  the 
the  champions  of  orthodoxy.  In  him  is  exemplified  the  sort 
of  antagonism  that  exists  between  delicacy  of  perception  and 
strength  of  execution,  and  renders  their  equal  development 
so  rare  in  one  and  the  same  character.  With  great  capacity 
in  both  directions,  St.  Jerome  seems  alternately  to  sacrifice 
one  of  these  interests  to  the  other.  In  his  zealous  self -hatred 
it  never  occurred  to  him  apparently  that  the  difficulties  he 


THE   CAxVON   OF   THE   IV.  CENTURY  441 

was  contending  with  were  more  probably  the  effect  of  mental 
strain  and  nervous  exhaustion  than  of  an  overplus  of  animal 
energy,  and  therefore  w^ere  rather  augmented  than  alleviated 
by  his  violent  methods.  In  the  feverish  vision  of  his  judg- 
ment before  Christ's  tribunal — embodying  no  doubt  the 
state  of  his  conscience  at  the  time — the  whole  apparatus  of 
secular  learning  by  which  he  himself  was  subsequently 
enabled  to  become  so  acute  an  exponent  and  defender  of  the 
faith,  and  which  the  later  Church  blessed,  sanctified,  and 
consecrated  to  the  service  of  religion,  was  condemned  with- 
out qualification  as  repugnant  to  Christianity;  even  as  the 
body  and  all  natural  affections  were  indiscriminately  con- 
demned as  inimical  to  virtue  and  sanctity. 

It  is  mainly  to  the  gigantic  force  of  his  intellect,  to  his 
stupenduous  power  of  work,  to  his  prodigious  scholarship — 
as  scholarship  went  in  those  days — ^that  he  owes  his  prom- 
inence in  the  history  of  Christianity.  When  we  think  of 
what  he  did,  and  did  single-handed,  for  Scriptural  criticism 
and  exegesis:  how  he  created  order  and  coherence  where 
previously  there  had  been  wild  chaos  and  confusion,  how  he 
expanded  and  applied  the  critical  principles  then  in  vogue  as 
far  as  the  material  to  hand  would  permit  we  cannot  help 
wondering  what  he  would  do,  what  he  would  be  allowed  to 
do,  were  he  among  us  now,  and  were  he  master — as  doubtless 
he  would  be — of  the  rich  harvest  of  learning  and  information 
that  has  been  accumulating  during  the  intervening  centuries. 
Jerome's  attitude  towards  the  deuterocanonical  books 
was  not  consistent.  At  times  he  bitterly  attacks  them,  as  in 
the  following  passages. 

In  his  celebrated  Prologus  Galeatus,  after  the  enumera- 
tion of  the  protocanonical  books,  he  continues :  "Whatever 
is  outside  of  these  is  to  be  placed  among  the  Apocrypha. 
Therefore  the  Wisdom  which  is  commonly  ascribed  to  Solo- 
mon, and  the  book  of  Jesus  the  son  of  Sirach,  Judith,  Tobias, 
and  Pastor  are  not  in  the  Canon.  The  first  Book  of  Macca- 
bees I  found  in  Hebrew,  the  second  is  originally  Greek,  as 
appears  from  the  dictiort." 

Again  in  the  Preface  to  Ezra :  "What  is  not  received  by 
them,  (the  Hebrews)  and  what  is  not  of  the  twenty-four 


442  THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY 

Ancients  (the  protocanonical  books)  is  to  he  repulsed  far  from 
one.'' 

In  his  Preface  to  the  Books  of  Solomon:  "There  exist 
also  Panaretus,  the  book  of  Jesus  the  Son  of  Sirach,  and 
another  of  the  pseudepigrapha  which  is  called  the  Wisdom  of 
Solomon.  The  first  I  found  in  Hebrew,  not  called  Ecclesias- 
ticus,  as  with  the  Latins,  but  Parables:  the  second  is 
nowhere  with  the  Hebrews,  and  the  very  style  savors  of 
Greek  eloquence,  and  some  of  the  old  writers  have  ascribed 
it  to  Philo  the  Jew.  As,  therefore,  the  Church  reads  Judith, 
Tobias,  and  the  books  of  Maccabees,  but  does  not  hold  them 
canonical,  thus  let  her  read  these  two  volumes  for  the  edifi- 
cation of  the  people,  not  for  the  confirmation  of  ecclesiasti- 
cal dogmas." 

In  his  Praef.  in  Esther:  *To  this  book  the  received 
Latin  version  has  added  various  ragged  patches  of  words, 
adding  the  things  which  might  be  suggested  by  the  theme." 
Here  is  an  evident  condemnation  of  the  deuterocanonical 
fragments  of  Esther. 

Writing  to  Laeta,  Epist.  107,  12,  on  the  mode  of  instruct- 
ing her  daughter,  he  says:  *'Let  her  shun  all  Apocrypha 
(the  deuterocanonical  books),  and  if  ever  she  should  read 
them,  not  for  confirmation  of  dogmas,  but  out  of  reverence 
for  the  words,  let  her  know  that  they  are  not  of  those  who 
appear  in  the  titles,  and  that  there  are  many  false  things  inter- 
mingled in  them,  and  that  one  has  need  of  great  prudence  to 
seek  the  gold  in  the  slime.''  In  his  Commentary  on  Daniel, 
although  he  comments  the  deuterocanonical  fragments,  he 
is  inclined  to  think  that  they  are  fables  of  Greek  origin.  It 
does  not  increase  our  esteem  of  Jerome's  critique  to  find  that 
one  cause  of  his  doubt  of  the  fragments  is  that  in  the  four- 
teenth chapter,  first  verse,  the  King  of  Babylon  is  said  to 
cry  out  with  a  loud  voice ;  whereas  Jerome  had  maintained 
that  only  the  saints  are  said  in  Scripture  to  cry  out  with  a 
loud  voice. 

In  his  prologue  to  Daniel,  he  justifies  himself  for  having 
fixed  an  obelus  to  the  fragments  of  Daniel,  alleging  that 
"Origen,  and  Eusebius,  and  Apollinaris  and  other  church- 
writers  and  doctors  of  Greece  declare  that  these  visions  have 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY  443 

no  place  with  the  Hebrews,  and  that  they  needed  not  to 
respond  to  Porphyrius  in  defense  of  those  things  to  which 
the  Holy  Scriptures  gave  no  authority." 

In  his  prologue  to  Jeremiah  he  declares  that  he  has 
omitted  the  book  of  Baruch,  and  the  pseudepigraphic  Epistle 
of  Jeremiah,  ''setting  at  naught  the  rage  of  his  calumnia- 
tors.' '  We  have  no  wish  to  minimize  Jerome's  opposition  to 
the  deuterocanonical  books.  At  times  it  was  pronounced 
and  violent.  But  he  could,  at  most,  only  be  termed  a  vio- 
lent doubter.  He  never  was  calm  and  constant  in  his  re- 
jection of  those  books.  The  fact  that,  in  such  strange  oppo- 
sition, he  was  at  variance  with  all  his  contemporaries,  made 
him  waver,  and  we  find  more  quotations  from  deuterocanonical 
Scripture  in  Jerome,  than  in  any  other  writer  yet  quoted.  Oft 
when  opposed  by  his  adversaries  for  his  Scriptural  views  he 
vented  his  resentment  upon  the  books  themselves.  Then, 
when  asked  by  a  friend,  he  would  calmly  discuss  the  merits 
of  these  same  writings.  He  translated  Tobias  from  the 
Chaldaic  at  the  instance  of  Chromatius  and  Heliodorus,  the 
bishops,  ''judging  it  better  to  displease  the  Pharisees,  in  order 
to  grant  the  requests  of  the  bishops."     Praef.  in  Lib.  Tob. 

In  Jerome's  mind  there  was  ever  a  conflict  between  two 
principles.  By  conviction  and  education  he  was  a  Chris- 
tian, moulded  by  Christian  tradition.  His  higher  studies 
had  made  him  in  a  certain  sense  a  Jew.  The  weird  quaint 
beauty  of  the  Hebrew  tongue,  the  deeper  insight  into  the 
substance  of  the  Old  Law  which  only  Hebraists  can  have,  the 
conviction  that  of  all  the  Christian  writers  of  his  time,  he 
alone  knew  Hebrew,  made  him  look  with  disfavor  upon  the 
books  which  the  Jews  rejected.  It  is  an  evidence  in  favor 
of  the  deuterocanonical  books  that  they  retained  their  place 
in  the  list  of  Scripture  after  the  many  tests  to  which  they 
were  subjected.  The  genius  of  Jerome  was  not  able  to  draw 
even  one  Father  to  entertain  his  views  on  the  deuterocanoni- 
cal works.  He  fluctuated  between  his  reverence  for  the 
Christian  tradition,  and  his  respect  for  the  Synagogue  till  his 
death,  and  contradicted  himself  many  times  in  his  views  on 
the  books  in  question. 


444 


THE   CANON   OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY 


Dan.  XIII.  6i 

**Et  consurrexerunt  adver- 
sus  duos  presbyteros  (convi- 
cerat  enim  eos  Daniel  ex  ore  suo 
falsum  dixisse  testimonium) 
feceruntque  eis  sicut  male  ege- 
rant   adversus   proximum. ' ' 


Dan.  XIV.  35 

"  Et  apprehendit  eum  Angel- 
us  Domini  in  vertice  ejus,  et 
portavit  eum  capillo  capitis 
sui,  posuitque  eum  in  Babylone 
supra  lacum  in  impetu  spiritus 
sui." 

Sap.  I.  II. 

"Custodite  ergo  vos  a  mur- 
muratione,  que  nihil  prodest, 
et  a  detractione  parcite  linguae, 
quoniam  sermo  obscurus  in  va- 
cuum non  ibit:  os  autem,  quod 
mentitur,  occidit  animam. " 

Sap.  VI.  7. 

*  *  Exiguo  enim  conceditur  mi- 
sericordia;  potentes  autem  po- 
tenter  tormenta  patientur. ' ' 

Dan.  XIII.  SI. 

''Et  dixit  ad  eos  Daniel;  Se- 
parate illos  ab  invicem  procul, 
et  dijudicabo  eos. ' ' 

Judith  XII.  10. 

** — et  percussit  bis  in  cervi- 
cem,  et  abscidit  caput  ejus,  et 
abstulit  conopeum  ejus  a  co- 
lumnis,  evolvit  corpus  ejus 
truncum  etc. 


St.  Jerome,  Epist.  I.  9. 

"Nunc  Susanna  nobilis  fide 
omnium  subeat  mentibus,  quae 
iniquo  damnata  judicio,  Spiri- 
tu  Sanctopuerum  replente,  sal- 
vata  est.  Ecce  non  dispar  in 
utraque  misericordia  Domini. 
Ilia  liberata  per  judicem,  ne 
iret  ad  gladium;  haec  a  judice 
damnata,  absoluta  per  gladium 
est." 

Epist.  III.  I. 

**0  si  nunc  mihi  Dominus 
Jesus  Christus ....  Habacuc  ad 
Danielem  translationem  conce- 
deret!" 


Epist.XIV.  6. 

"Os    autem   quod  mentitur 
occidit  animam. ' ' 


Ibid.  9 

'Totenter  potentes  tormen- 
ta patientur. ' ' 

Ibid. 

"Presbyteros  puer  Daniel  ju- 
dicat. ' ' 


Epist.  XXII.  21. 
'Tunc  Holofemis  caput  Ju- 
dith continens  amputavit. ' ' 


THE   CANON   OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY 


445 


Esther  XIV.  ii. 

"Ne  tradas,  Domine,  scep- 
trum  tuum  his,  qui  non  sunt, ' ' 
etc. 

Sap.  II.  23. 

"Quoniam  Deus  creavit  ho- 
minem  inexterminabilem,  et  ad 
imaginem  similitudinis  suae  fe- 
cit ilium. ' ' 

Judith  VIII.  6,  et  XIII.  9,10 


Eccli.  XXV.  12. 

''Beatus,  qui  invenit  ami- 
cum  verum,  et  qui  enarrat  jus- 
titiam  auri  audienti." 

Certainly  Jerome  does  not 
mitted  to  memory  Apocryphal 

Eccli.  III.  ss. 

"Ignem  ardentem  extinguit 
aqua,  et  eleemosyna  resistit 
peccatis — . ' ' 

EccH.  IV.  25. 

"Est  enim  confusio  adduc- 
ens  peccatum,  et  est  confusio 
adducens  gloriam  et  gratiam. ' ' 

EccH.  XI.  27. 

"In  die  bonorum  ne  imme- 
mor  sis  malorum:  et  in  die  mal- 


Epist.  XLVIII.  14 

"Ne  tradas,  inquit  Esther, 
hereditatem  his  qui  non  sunt, 
idolis  scilicet  et  daemonibus. ' ' 

Epist.  LI.  6 

*  *  Dicit  enim  (Salomon)  in  Sa- 
pientia  quae  titulo  ejus  inscribi- 
tur: '  Creavit  Deus  incorruptum 
hominem,  et  imaginem  suae  pro- 
prietatis  dedit  ei. ' ' 

Epist.  LIV.  16. 

* '  Legimus  in  Judith  (si  cui 
tamen  placet  volumen  recip- 
pere)  viduam  confectam  jeju- 
niis  et  habitu  lugubri  sordida- 
tam,  quae  non  lugebat  mortu- 
um  virum  sed  squalore  corpo- 
ris, Sponsi  quaerebat  adventum. 
Video  armatam  gladio  manum 
cruentam  dexteram.  Recog- 
nosco  caput  Holophemis  de  me- 
diis  hostibus  reportatum. ' ' 

Epist.  LVII.  I. 

' '  Legerat  enim  (Paulus) 
illud  Jesu :  *  Beatus  qui  in 
aures  loquitur  audientis. 

wish  to  say  that  Paul  com- 
Scripture. 

Epist.  LXVI.  5. 

" — sciens  scrip tum;  ^Sicut 
aqua  extinguit  ignem;  ita  elee- 
mosyna peccatum.'  " 

Ibid.  5. 

"Est  confusio  quae  ducit  ad 
mortem,  et  est  confusio  quae 
ducit  ad  vitam. ' ' 

Epist.  LXXVII.  6. 
" — scilicet  in  die  bona  malo- 
rum non  oblita  est. ' ' 


446 


THE    CANON    OF   THE   IV.  CENTURY 


orum   ne   immemor  sis    bono- 
rum..— ." 

Sap.  IV.  II. 

*' — raptus  est  ne  malitia  mu- 
taret  intellectum  ejus,  aut  ne 
fictio  deciperet  animam  illius. ' 

Sap.  IV.  8. 

"Senectus  enim  venerabilis 
est  non  diutuma,  neque  annor- 
um  numero  computata:  cani 
autem  sunt  sensus  hominis. ' ' 

Sap.  I.  7. 

* '  Quoniam  spiritus  Domini 
replevit  orbem  terrarum, ' '  etc. 


Epist.  LXXIX.  2. 

"Raptus  est  ne  malitia  mu- 
taret  mentem  ejus,  quia  plac- 
ita  erat  Deo  anima  illius. ' ' 

Ibid.  6. 

"Cani  enim  hominis  sapien- 
tia  ejus. ' ' 


Epist.  XCVIII.  13. 

"Et  alibi  legimus:  'Spiritus 
Domini  replevit  orbem  terra- 
rum.  '  Quod  nunquam  Scrip- 
tura  memoraret  nisi  irrationa- 
bilia  quaeque  et  inanima  illius 
nomine  complerentur. ' ' 

Ibid.  19. 

" — et  in  illius  perse verantes 
amore  cantabimus/ Amator  fui 
pulchritudinis  ejus. ' ' 


Sap.  VIII.  2. 

"Hanc  amavi,  et  exquisivi  a 
juventute  mea  et  quaesivi 
sponsam  mihi  eam  assumere, 
et  amator  factus  sum  formae 
illius. ' ' 

A  testimony  that  can  be  joined  with  those  of  Jerome  is 
that  of  Theophilus,  Bishop  of  Alexandria,  which  was  trans- 
lated by  Jerome.  It  is  designated  as  Epist.  C.  in  Migne's 
Works  of  Jerome.  In  the  ninth  paragraph  Theophilus 
speaks  of  the  Maccabees  as  follows : 
II.  Maccab.  Passim. 

' '  Quid  memorem  insignes 
Maccabaeorum  victorias ?  qui, 
ne  illicitis  camibus  vescerentur 
et  communes  tangerent  cibos, 
corpora  obtulere  cruciatibus: 
totiusque  orbis  in  ecclesiis  Chris- 
ti  laudihus  prcudicantur,  forti- 
ores  poenis,  ardentiores  quibus 
comburebantur  ignibus. ' ' 


THE   CANON    OF    THE    IV.  CENTURY 


447 


Could  the  universal  Church  give  such  honor  to  Apocryphal 
martyrs  ? 

Sap.  IX.  15. 

* — corpus  enim,  quod  cor- 
rumpitur,  aggravat  animam,et 
terrena  inhabitatio  deprimit 
sensum  multa  cogitantem. ' ' 


Eccli.  XXII.  6. 
"Musica  in  luctu  importuna 
narratio. ' ' 


Epist.  CVIII.  22. 

* '  Si  non  erit  sublata  diversi- 
tate  sexus  eadem  corpora  non 
resurgent:  '  Aggrava  etnim  ter- 
rena inhabitatio  sensum  multa 
cogitantem. '  " 

Epist.  CXVIII.  I. 

''Divina  Scriptura  loquitur: 
'Musica  in  luctu,  intempestiva 
narratio. ' ' ' 


If  words  can  express  thoughts,  the  man  who  penned  these 
lines  believed  that  he  was  quoting  the  inspired  word  of  God. 

Eccli.  XXVII.  28 


''Qui  in  altum  mittit  lapid- 
em, super  caput  ejus  cadet;  et 
plaga  dolosa  dolosi  dividet  vul- 
nera. ' ' ' 

Esther  XIV.  16. 

*  *  Tu  scis  necessitatem  meam, 
quod  abominer  signum  super- 
bise  et  gloriae  meae,  quod  est  su- 
per caput  meum  in  diebus  os- 
tentationis  meae,  et  detester 
illud  quasi  pannum  menstrua- 
tae, ' '  etc. 


Eccli.  IV.  28. 
** — nee  retineas   verbum 
tempore  salutis. ' ' 


m 


Eccli.  XXVIII.  28. 

"Sepi  aures  tuas  spinis,  lin- 
guam  nequam  noli  audire,  et 
ori  tuo  facito  ostia  et  seras. ' ' 


Epist.CXXV.  19. 

"Et  alibi:  'Qui  mittit  in  al- 
tum lapidem,  recidet  in  caput 
ejus.'  " 

Epist.  CXXX.  4. 

"Oderat  omatum  suum  et 
cum  Esther  loquebatur  ad  Do- 
minum:  'Tu  nosti  quod  ode- 
rim  insigne  capitis  mei,  et  tan- 
tas  ducam  immunditiae  velut 
pannum  menstruatae. '  ' ' 

Epist.  CXLVIIL  2. 

" — illud  mecum  Scripturae 
reputans:  'Tempus  tacendi,  et 
tempus  loquendi. '  Et  iterum: 
'Ne  retineas  verbum  in  tem- 
pore salutis.'  " 

Ibid.  16. 

"Noli."  inquit  Scriptura, 
'consentaneus  esse,  etc. '  Et 
alibi:  'Sepi  aures  tuas  spinis,  et 
noli  audire  linguam  nequam.'  " 


448 


THE    CANON   OF   THE   IV.  CENTURY 


Eccli.  XXVIII.  29-30. 

"Aunim  tuum  et  argentum 
tuum  confla,  et  verbis  tuis  faci- 
to  stateram,  et  frenos  ori  tuo 
rectos  :  et  attende,  ne  forte 
labaris  in  lingua — . ' ' 

Eccli.  III.  20. 

"Quanto  magnus  es,  humilia 
te  in  omnibus,  et  coram  Deo 
invenies  gratiam — . ' ' 


Eccli.  X.  10. 

"Quoniam  a  Deo  profecta 
est  sapientia, ' '  etc. 

Sap.  VI.  26. 

"Multitudo  autem  sapienti- 
um  sanitas  est  orbis  terrarum; 
et  rex  sapiens  stabilimentum 
populi  est. ' ' 

Tob.  IV.  16. 

'  *  Quod  ab  alio  oderis  fieri  ti- 
bi, ' '  etc. 

Sap.  XI.  27. 

"Parcis  autem  omnibus, 
quoniam  tua  sunt,  Domine, 
qui  amas  animas. ' ' 


Dan.  XIII.  Passim. 


Ibid.  18. 

"Unde  Scriptura  dicit:  'Ar- 
gentum et  aurum  tuum  confla, 
et  verbis  tuis  facito  stateram  et 
frenos  ori  tuo  rectos:  et  attende 
ne  forte  labaris  lingua.'  " 

Ibid.  20. 

"Unde  Scriptura  dicit  : 
'Quanto  magnus  es;  humilia 
te  in  omnibus,  et  coram  Deo 
invenies  gratiam. '  ' ' 

St.  Jerome  Interpretatio 
Lib.  Didymi,  10. 

"  ^  Dominus, '  in  quit,  'dabit 
'sapientiam,  et  a  facie  ejus  sap- 
ientia et  intellectus  procedit.'  " 

Ibid.  21. 

* '  Multitudo  quippe  sapien- 
tium,  salus  mundi. ' ' 


Ibid.  39. 

' '  Quod  tibi  non  vis  fieri, 


etc. 


Ibid.  46. 

" — ^juxta  illud  quod  alibi 
scribitur:  Tarces  autem  omni- 
bus, Domine  amator  anima- 
rum,  quia  tuae  sunt,  neque  en- 
im  odies  quos  fecisti.' 

Adversus  Jovinian,  25. 

"Erat  igitur  Daniel  adhuc 
puer,  et  notus  populo  vel  prop- 
ter interpret ationem  somnio- 
rum  regis  vel  propter  Susannse 
liberationem  et  occisionem 
presby  t  er  orum . 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   IV.  CENTURY 


449 


Sap.  VI.  7. 

'  *  Exiguo  enim  conceditur 
misericordia;  potentes  autem 
potenter  tormenta  patientur. ' ' 


Sap.  I.  4-5- 

* '  Quoniam  in  malevolam  ani- 
mam  non  introibit  sapientia, 
nee  habitabit  in  corpore  sub- 
dito  peccatis.  Spiritus  enim 
sanctus  disciplinse  effugiet  fic- 
tum,  et  auferet  se  a  cogitationi- 
bus,  quae  sunt  sine  intellectu, 
et  corripietur  a  superveniente 
iniquitate. ' ' 


Adversusjov.  Lib.  II.  25. 

** — quanto  majoris  criminis, 
tan  to  majoris  et  poenae.  *  Po- 
tentes enim  potenter  tormenta 
patientur.'  " 

Apologia  Adversus  Rufinum 
17- 

'  *  Loquitur  et  Sapientia  quam 
sub  nomine  Salomonis  legimus: 
'In  malevolam  animam  nun- 
quam  intrabit  sapientia,  nee 
habitabit  in  corpore  subdito 
peccatis.  Spiritus  enim  Sanc- 
tus eruditionis  fugiet  dolum  et 
recedet  a  cogitationibus  stul- 
tis.'  " 


Sap.  I.  II. 

"Custodite  ergo  vos  a  mur- 
muratione,  quae  nihil  prodest, 
et  a  detractione  parcite  linguae, 
quoniam  sermo  obscurus  in  va- 
cuum non  ibit:  os  autem,  quod 
mentitur  occidit  animam. ' ' 


Eccli.  III.  22. 

"Altiora  te  ne  quaesieris,  et 
fortiora  tene  scrutatus  fueris, ' ' 
etc. 


Adversus  Rufinum  Lib.  Ill 

26. 
"Os  quod  mentitur  occidit 
animam. ' ' 


Adversus    Pelagianos   Lib. I. 

33- 

"Respondet  stultae  interro- 
gationituae  liber  Sapientia:  *A1- 
tiora  te  ne  quaesieris,  et  forti- 
ora te  ne  scrutatus  fueris.'  " 


11.  Maccab.  V.  Passim. 


Adversus  Pelagianos  Lib.  II. 

30- 
"Antiochus  Epiphanius  rex 
crudelissimus  subvertit  altare, 
ipsamque  justitiam  fecit  concul- 
cari,  quia  concessum  erat  a  Do- 
mino, causasque  reddit  prop- 
ter peccata  plurima. ' ' 


(29)  H.  S. 


450 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   IV.  CENTURY 


Tob.  XII.  7. 

"  Etenim  sacrament um  regis 
abscondere  bonum  est, ' '  etc. 

Eccli.  I.  33. 

"Fili,  concupiscens  sapien- 
tiam,  conserva  justitiam,  et 
Deus  praebebit  illam  tibi. ' ' 

Eccli.  XXVII.  29. 

"Et  qui  foveam  fodit,  incidet 
in  earn:  et  qui  statuit  lapidem 
proximo,  offendet  in  eo:  et  qui 
laqueum  alii  ponit,  peribit  in 
illo. ' ' 

Sap.  VI.  7. 

(Oft  quoted.) 


Sap.  II.  12. 

"  Circumveniamus  ergo  jus- 
tum,  quoniam  inutilis  est  nobis" 
etc. 

Dan.  XIII.  Passim. 


Sap.  IV.  8. 

"Senectus  enim  venerabilis 
est  non  diutuma,  neque  anno- 
rum  numero  computata:  cani 
autem  sunt  sensus  hominis. ' ' 


Comment,   in    Eccles.  Cap. 
VIII. 

*  *  Et  hoc  est  quod  in  libro  To- 
biae  scribitur:  'Mysterium  regis 
abscondere  bonum  est.'  " 

Ibid.  Cap.  IX. 
Dato  nobis  itaque  praecepto 
quod  dicit:    'Desiderasti  sapi- 
entiam,  serva  mandata,  et  Do- 
minus  ministrabit  tibi  eam.'  " 

Ibid.  Cap.  X. 

"  Siquidem  et  alibi  ipse  Salo- 
mon ait:  'Qui  statuit  laqueum, 
capietur  in  illo.'  " 

Comment,  in  Isaiam,  Cap.  I. 
Vers.  24. 

" — de  quibus  scriptum  est: 
'potentes  potenter  tormenta 
patientur.'  "(Oft  quoted.) 

Ibid.  Lib.  II.  Cap.  III.  Vers. 
I. 

" — cogitastis  consilium  pes- 
simum  dicentes:  'Alligemus  jus- 
tum,  quia  inutilis  est  nobis.  ' ' 

Ibid.  Vers.  2. 

*  *  Et  in  Vetera  tos  dierum  mal- 
orum  duos  presbyteros  juxta 
Theodotionem  in  Danielis  prin- 
cipio  legimus. ' ' 

Ibid. 

" — de  qua  scriptum  est:  'Ca- 
nities hominum,  prudentiaest." 

Ibid.  Vers.  3. 

' '  Unde  et  illud  in  nostris  lih- 
ris  legimus:  'Amici  tibi  sint  plu- 
rimi,  consiliarius  autem  unus 
demille.'  " 


THE   CANON    OF    THE  IV.  CENTURY 


461 


Eccli.  VII.  6. 

"Noli  quaerere  fieri  judex, 
nisi  valeas  virtute  irnimpere 
iniquitates, ' '  etc. 

Eccli.  XI.  30. 

"Ante  mortem  ne  laudes  ho- 
minem  quemquam,  quoniam 
in  filiis  suis  agnoscitur  vir. ' ' 


Eccli.  XIII.  I. 
"Qui  tetigerit  picem,  inquin 
abitur  ab  ea, "  etc. 


Esther.     Passim. 


Dan.  XIII.  56. 

'*Et  amoto  eo,  jussit  venire 
alium  et  dixit  ei:  Semen  Cha- 
naan,  et  non  Juda,  species  de- 
cepit  te, "  etc. 

Sap.  IV.  8. 

(Oft  quoted.) 

Eccli.  I.  33. 

(Oft  quoted.) 


Sap.  VI.  7. 

(Oft  quoted.) 


Ibid.  Vers.  7. 

*  *  — aliudque  man  datum :  '  Ne 
quaeras  judex  fieri:  ne  forte  non 
possis    auferre    iniquitates.'  " 

Ibid.  Vers.  12. 

" — nee  praevenit  sententiam 
judicis  sui,  dicente  Scriptura 
sancta:  'Ne  beatum  dicas  quem- 
quam hominem  ante  mortem. ' ' 

Ibid.  Lib.  III.  Cap.  VI. 
Ver.   5. 

"Ex  quo  ostenditur  noxium 
esse  vivere  cum  peccatoribus: 
'Qui  enim  tan  git  picem,  inquin- 
abitur  ab  ea.'  " 

Ibid.  Lib.  V.  Cap.  XIV. 
Vers.  2. 

"Potest  et  in  Assueri  tempo- 
ribus  intelligi,  quando,  occiso 
Holopheme,  hostilis  ab  Israel 
est  caesus  exercitus. ' ' 

Ibid.  Lib.  VII.  Cap.  XXIII. 
Vers.  12. 

"Unde  et  ad  senem  adulte- 
rum  dicitur:  'Semen  Chanaan 
et  non  Juda,  species  decepit  te. " 

Ibid.  Lib.  VIII.  Cap.  XXIV. 
Vers.  21. 

(Oft  quoted.) 

Ibid.  Cap.  XXVI.  Vers.  4. 

"Unde  et  in  alio  loco  scribi- 
tur:  'Desiderasti  sapientiam, 
serva  mandata,  et  Dominus 
tribuettibi  eam.'  " 

Ibid.  Lib.  IX.  Cap.  XVIII. 
Vers.  23.  et.  seqq. 
(Oft  quoted.) 


452 


THE   CANON   OF   THE  IV.  CENTURY 


Sap.  IX.  6. 

"Nam  et  si  quis  erit  consum- 
matus  inter  filios  hominum,  si 
ab  illo  abfuerit  sapientia  tua, 
in  nihilum  computabitur. ' ' 

Eccli.  X.  9. 

* '  Avaro  autem  nihil  est  sce- 
lestius.  Quid  superbit  terra  et 
cinis  ? ' ' 

Sap.  III.  13,  14. 

"Maledicta  creatura  eorum, 
quoniam  felix  est  sterilis,  et  in- 
coinquinata,  quae  nescivit  tho- 
rum  in  delicto,  habebit  fruc- 
tum  in  respectione  animarum 
sanctarum:  et  spado,  qui'non 
operatus  est  per  manus  suas  in- 
iquitatem,  nee  cogitavit  ad  ver- 
sus Deum  nequissima:  dabitur 
enim  illi  fidei  donum  electum, 
et  sors  in  templo  Dei  acceptis- 
sima. ' ' 

vSapI.  I. 

"Diligite  justitiam,  qui  judi- 
catis  terram.  Sentite  de  Dom- 
ino in  bonitate, ' '  etc. 

Eccli.  XXV.  12. 
" — ^beatus,    qui    invenit    ami- 
cum  verum,  et  qui  enarrat  jus- 
titiam auri  audienti — . ' ' 


Sap.  I.  4. 

*  *  Quoniam  in  malevolam  ani- 
mam  non  introibit  sapientia, 
nee  habitabit  in  corpore  sub- 
dito  peccatis. ' ' 


Ibid.  Cap.  XXIX.  Vers.  15, 
16. 

" — cum  scriptum  sit  de  Dei 
Sapientia:  *Si  enim  quis  perfec- 
tus  fuerit  m  filiis  hominum  abs- 
que tua  sapientia,  in  nihil  repu- 
tabitur.'  " 

Ibid.  Lib.  XIV.  Praef. 

"De  quo  scribitur:  'Quid  glo- 
riatur  terra  et  cinis  ?'  " 

Ibid.  Lib.  XV.  Cap.  LVI. 
Vers.  4,  5. 

'  *  Qui  sint  eunuchi  supra  dixi- 
mus.  .  .  .  quibus  loquitur  et  Sa- 
pientia quae  titulo  Salomonis 
inscribitur:  'Beata  sterilis  im- 
maculata  quae,  non  cognovit 
stratum  in  delicto ;  habebit  fruc- 
tum  in  visitatione  animarum. 
Et  eunuchus  qui  non  est  opera- 
tus manu  iniquitatem,  neque 
cogitavit  contra  Dominum 
mala.  Dabitur  enim  fidei  ejus 
electa  gratia  et  pars  in  templo 
Domini  delectabilis.'  " 

Ibid.  Cap.  LVI.  Vers.  10-12. 

" — et  audiamus  Scripturam 
monentem:  'Sapite  de  Domino 
in  bonitate.'  " 

Ibid.  Lib.  XVI.  Pr^f. 

"Ac  ne  a  profanis  tantum 
sumere  videor  exemplum,  nim- 
irum  hoc  illud  est  aliis  verbis 
Propheta  demonstrat:  *Bea- 
tus  qui  in  aures  loquitur  audi- 
entium. ' ' 

Ibid.  Vers.  15. 

"Et  quomodo  in  perversam 
an  imam  non  ingreditur  sapi- 
entia, neque  habitabit  in  cor- 
pore subdito  peccatis.'  " 


THE   CA'NON   OF  THE   IV.  CENTURY 


453 


Sap.L  5. 

"Spiritus  enim  Sanctus  dis- 
ciplinae  effugiet  fictum,  et  au- 
feret  se  a  cogitationibus, ' '  etc. 


Eccli.  XVI.  18. 

"Ecce  coelum,  et  coeli  coelo- 
rum,  abyssus,  et  uni versa  terra, 
quae  in  eis  sunt,  in  conspectu 
illius  commovebuntur. 

Esther.  XIV.  16. 

' '  Tu  scis  necessitatem  meam, 
quod  abominer  signum  super- 
bise  et  gloriae  meae,  quod  est  su- 
per caput  meum  in  diebus  os- 
tentationis  meae,  et  detester  il- 
lud  quasi  pannum  menstruatae, 
et  non  portem  in  diebus  silen- 
tii  mei — . ' ' 


Esther  XIV.  11. 

'*Ne  tradas,   Domine,   scep- 
trum  tuum  his,  qui  non  sunt, 
etc. 

Eccli.  XL  27,  29. 

"In  die  bonorum  ne  imme- 
mor  sis  malorum,  et  in  die  mal- 
orum  ne  immemor  sis  bonorum. 
MaUtia  horae  obHvionem  facit 
luxuriae  magnae,  et  in  fine  ho- 
minis denudatio operum  illius." 

Sap.  VI.  7. 

(Oft  quoted.) 


Ibid.  Lib.  XVII.  Cap.  LXIII. 
Vers.  10. 

"De  quo  et  in  Sapientia  re- 
perimus  quae  nomine  Salomo- 
nis  scribitur:  'Sanctus  enim 
Spiritus  disciplinae  fugiet  do- 
lum,  et  recede t  a  cogitationi- 
bus stultis.'  " 

Ibid.  Vers.  15. 

"Denique  Salomon  qui  aedi- 
ficavit  domum  Dei,  ad  eum  pre- 
cans  loquitur:  'Coeli  coelorum 
et  terra  non  sufficiunt  tibi.' 

Ibid.  Lib.  XVII.  Cap.  LXIV. 
Vers.  6. 

" — cui  et  Esther  diadema 
suuili  quod  erat  regiae  potesta- 
tis  insigne  comparat  quod  ne- 
quaquam  voluntate  sed  necessi- 
tate portabat:  'Tu  scis  necessi- 
tatem meam:  quoniam  detestor 
signum  superbiae  meae,  quod  est 
super  caput  meum  in  diebus  os- 
tensionis  meae:  abominor  illud 
sicut  pannum  menstruum:  nee 
porto  in  diebus  quietis.' 

Ibid.  Lib.  XVIII.  Cap.  LXV. 
Vers.  3. 

' '  Unde  et  Esther  loquitur  ad 
Dominum:  'Ne  tradas  haeredi- 
tatem  tuam  his  qui  non  sunt.'  " 

Ibid.  Vers.  17,  18. 

" — ^juxta  illud  quod  scrip- 
tum  est:  'In  die  bona,  oblivio 
malorum,  et  alibi:  Afflictio  ho- 
rae oblivionem  facit  delicia- 
rum.'  " 

Ibid.  Vers.  20. 

(Oft  quoted.) 


454 


THE   CANON   OF   THE  IV.  CENTURY 


Ibid.  Comment,    in     Jerem.    Lib. 

III.      Cap.  XII.  Vers.  13. 
Ibid.  Lib.  IV.  Cap.  XVIII. 

Vers.  18. 
" — dicente     Scriptura:     'In 
perversam  animam  non  intra- 
bit  Sapientia.'  ' ' 

Ibid.  Cap.  XXI.  Vers.  14. 
" — ^juxta   illud   quod   scrip- 
turn  est:  Mors  viro  requies  cui 
clausit  Deus  viam  suam. ' ' 
The  same  quotation  appears  in  the  twent^^-third  Chap- 
ter, fifth  and  following  verses. 


Sap.  I.  4. 

(Already  quoted). 


Eccli.  XXII.  II. 
"Modicum  plora  supra  mor- 
tuum,  quoniam  requievit. '  * 


Sap.  VIII.  2. 

Hanc  amavi,  et  exquisivi  a 
juventute  mea,  et  quassivi  spon- 
sam  mihi  earn  assumere,  et  am- 
ator  f  actus  sum  formae  illius. ' ' 


Dan.  XIII.  56,  57. 

"Et  amoto  eo,  jussit  venire 
alium.  et  dixit  ei:  Semen  Cha- 
naan,  et  non  Juda,  species  de- 
cepit  te,  et  concupiscentia  sub- 
vertit  cor  tuum:  sic  faciebatis 
filiabus  Israel,  et  illae  timentes 
loquebantur  vobis,  sed  filia  Ju- 
da non  sustinuit  iniquitatem 
vestram. ' ' 

Eccli.  XXIL  6. 
"Musica  in  luctu  importuna 
narratio,"  etc. 

Sap.  VI.  7. 

Dan.  XIII.  32. 
"At  iniqui  illi  jusserunt  ut 
discooperiretur  (erat  enim  co- 


Ibid.  Lib.  V.  Cap.  XXIX.  Vers. 
I  et  seqq. 

"Et  in  alio  loco  (scribit  Salo- 
mon): 'Hanc  exquisivi  spon- 
sam  accipere  mihi,  et  amator 
tactus  sum  decoris  ejus. '  " 

Ibid.  Cap.  XXIX.  Vers.  21 
et  seqq. 

' '  — quorum  uni  loquitur 
Daniel :  '  Inveterate  dierum 
malorum.  Et  alteri:  Semen 
Chanaan  et  non  Juda,  species 
decepit  te,  et  concupiscentia 
subvertit  cor  tuum.  Sic  facie- 
batis filiabus  Israel  et  illae  me- 
tuentes  loquebantur  vobiscum, 
sed  non  filia  Juda  sustinuit  ini- 
quitatem vestram. '  ' ' 

Comment,  in  Ezechiel.  Praef. 

" — ^nec  putavi  illam  senten- 
tiam  negligendam:  'Musica  in 
luctu,  importuna  narratio.' 

Ibid.  Lib.  II.  Cap.  V.  Vers. 
8,  9. 

Ibid  Cap.  VI.  Vers.  9,  10. 

' '  Quam  ob  causam  et  in  Dan- 
iele  duo  presbyteri  praeceperunt 


THE    CANON   OF   THE  IV.  CENTURY 


465 


operta)   ut  vel  sic  satiarentur 
decore  ejus. " 

Dan.  XIII.  56. 

(Oft  quoted.) 


Sap.  VII.  22. 

" — est  enim  in  ilia  spiritus 
intelligentiae,  sanctus,  unicus, 
multiplex,  subtilis,  disertus, 
mobilis,  incoinquinatus,  certus, 
suavis,  amans  bonum,  acutus, 
quern  nihil  vetat,  benef  aciens — . 

In  the  fifth  book  Jerome  quotes  frequently  the  sentence 
of  Wisdom  VI.  7 :     'Totentes  potenter  tormenta  patientur." 

Lib.  V.  Cap.  XVI.  Vers.  59, 


revelari  Susannam  ut  nudati 
corporis  decore  fruerentur. ' ' 

Ibid.  Lib.  IV.  Cap.  XVI. 
Vers.  3. 

"Mirabilis  Daniel  qui  ad  pres- 
byterum  delinquentem,  et  adul- 
terio  jungentem  homicidium 
puer  ausus  est  dicere:  'Semen 
Chanaan  et  non  Juda,  species 
decepitte.'  " 

Ibid.  Vers.  10. 

' '  Nam  et  in  libro  Sapientise 
qui  a  quibusdam  Salomonis  in- 
scribitur,  spiritus  sapientiae 
unigenitus  et  multiplex  tenuis 
et  mutabilis  appellatur.. ' ' 


Eccli.  XV.  9. 

' '  Non  est  speciosa  laus  in  ore 
peccatoris. '  * 

Eccli.  III.  22. 

"Altiora  te  ne  quaesieris,  et 
fortiora  te  ne  scrutatus  fueris: 
sed  quae  praecepit  tibi  Deus,  ilia 
cogita  semper,  et  in  pluribus 
operibus  ejus  ne  fueris  curio- 
sus. ' ' 

Eccli.  XXXII.  I. 

"Rectorem  te  posuerunt? 
noli  extoUi:  esto  in  illis  quasi 
unus  ex  ipsis. ' ' 

Eccli.  X.  9. 

**Avaro  autem  nihil  est  sce- 
lestius.  Quid  superbit  terra 
etcinis?" 


et  seqq. 
"Non   est   pulchra   laudatio 
in  ore  peccatoris. ' ' 

Ibid.  Lib.  VI.  Cap.  XVJII 

Vers.  6.  et  seqq. 
"Sed    et    illud    quod    alibi 
dicitur :  'Majora  te  non  requiras, 
et  fortiora  te  non  scruteris.*  " 


Ibid. 

"De  quibus  scriptum  est; 
Trincipem  te  constituerunt  ? 
ne  elevens:  esto  inter  eos  quasi 
unus  ex  ipsis.'  " 

Ibid. 

" — cui  illud  convenit:  'Quid 
gloriatur  terra  et  cinis  ?'  ' ' 


456 


THE   CANON   OF   THE  IV.  CENTURY 


Esther  XIV.  ii. 

"Ne  tradas,  Domine,  scep- 
trum  tuum  his,  qui  non  sunt, ' ' 
etc. 


Ibid.  Lib.VIII.  Cap.  XXVII. 
Vers.  19. 

Unde  et  Esther  contra  idola 
loquens:  'Ne  tradas,*  inquit, 
'sceptrum  tuum  his  qui  non 
sunt.'  " 


The  same  quotation  occurs  again  in  the  thirty-third 
verse  of  the  same  chapter  of  the  commentary. 

Ibid.  Lib.  IX.  Cap.  XXIX. 


Sap.  VI.  7. 

'  *  Exiguo  enim  conceditur 
misericordia:  potentes  autem 
potenter  tormenta  patientur. ' ' 

Eccli.  I.  2. 

"Arenam  maris,  et  pluviae 
guttas,  et  dies  saeculi  quis  dinu- 
meravit?  Altitudinem  caeli,  et 
latitudinem  terrae,  et  proftm- 
dum  abyssi  quis  dimensus  est?" 

Eccli.  XXVII.  29. 
"Et  qui  foveam  fodit,  inci- 
det  in  eam,  "  etc. 

Eccli.  XX.  32. 

"Sapientia  absconsa  et  the- 
saurus invisus:  quae  utilitas  in 
utrisque  ? '  * 


Eccli.  VII.  6. 

"Noli  quaerere  fieri  judex, 
nisi  valeas  virtute  irrumpere 
iniquitates:  ne  forte  extimes- 
cas  faciem  potentis,  et  ponas 
scandalum  in  aequitate  tua. ' ' 

EccH.  III.  29. 

"Cor  nequam  gravabitur  in 
doloribus,  et  peccator  adjiciet 
ad  peccandum. " 


Vers.  8.  et  seqq, 


Ibid.  Cap.  XXX.  Vers.  20  et 
seqq. 

"Et  in  alio  loco:  'Abyssum 
et  sapientiam  quis  investiga- 
bit?'  " 


Ibid.  Lib.  X.  Cap.  XXXII. 
Vers.  17.  et  seqq. 

'  *  Qui  enim  fodit  foveam  inci- 
det  in  eam. ' ' 

Ibid.  Cap.  XXXIII.  Vers,  i 
et  seqq. 

"De  magistris  negligentibus 
Salomon  loquitur:  'Sapientia 
abscondita,  et  thesaurus  occul- 
tus,  quas  utilitas  in  utrisque?' 

Ibid.  Lib.  XI.  Cap.  XXXIV 
I. 

*  *  Unde  magnopere  caven- 
dum  est  et  observanda  ilia  prae- 
cepta:  *Ne  quseras  judex  fieri, 
ne  forte  non  possis  auferre  ini- 
quitates, et  iterum:  quanto 
major  es,  tanto  magis  te  hu- 
milia,  et  in  conspectu  Domini 
invenies  gratiam. '  Et  rursum 
'Ducem   te   constituerunt,   ne 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY  457 

Eccli.  XXXII.  I.  elevens:  sedesto  inter  eos  quasi 

"Rectorem     te     posuerunt?     unusexillis.'  " 

noli  extolli:  esto  in  illis  quasi 

unus  ex  ipsis. ' ' 


Eccli.  I.  2. 

(Already  quoted.) 

Eccli.  XXXII.  I. 

(Already  quoted.) 
Eccli.  XXVIII.  29. 
" — et  verbis  tuis  facito  sta- 
teram,  et  frenos  ori  tuo  rectos." 


Ibid.  Lib.  XIII.  Cap.  XLIII. 

Vers.  13.  et  seqq. 
*  *  Scriptum  est :  *  Abyssum  et 
sapientiam  quis  investigabit?' " 

Ibid.  Cap.  XLV.  9. 


Ibid.  Vers.  10  et  seqq. 
" — dicente   Scriptura: 


Ser- 


monibus  tuis  lacies  stateram  et 
appendiculum.'  " 


Sap.  I.  4. 

(Already  quoted.) 


Comment,  in  Daniel,  Cap.  II. 

Vers.  21. 
"In  perversam  autem  ani- 
mam  non  introibit  sapientia. ' ' 

In  this  same  chapter  he  inveighs  against  the  deutero- 
canonical  fragments  of  Daniel.  In  the  twenty-third  verse  he 
says :  "And  observe  that  Daniel  is  of  the  sons  of  Juda,  not  a 
priest  as  the  fable  of  Bel  declares."  Coming  to  the  Canticle 
of  the  youths  in  the  fiery  furnace,  he  prefaces  his  commentary 
on  it  as  follows:  "Hitherto  the  Hebrews  read:  what  follows 
even  to  the  end  of  the  Canticle  of  the  three  youths  is  not  con- 
tained in  Hebrew;  concerning  which,  lest  we  may  seem  to 
have  passed  it  by,  a  few  words  are  to  be  said."  He  then 
proceeds  to  comment  it  in  the  same  manner  as  the  other 
portions  of  the  book. 

Ibid.  Cap.  VIII.  Vers.  14. 

* '  Legamus    Maccabaeorum 
libros  et  Josephi  historiam. ' ' 

Ibid.  Cap.  XL  Vers.  34,  35. 

"Lege  Maccabasorum libros. ' 

Ibid.   Cap.   XIL   Vers,    i   et 
seqq. 

"Ponit  quoque  historiam  de 
Maccabaeis  in  qua  dicitur  mul- 


I.  et  II.  Maccab.  Passim. 


458 


THE    CANON   OF   THE   IV.  CENTURY 


tos  Judaeorum  sub  Mathathia 
et  Juda  Maccabaeo  ad  eremum 
confugisse,  et  latuisse  in  spelun- 
cis  et  in  cavemis  petrarum,  et 
post  victoriam  processisse. ' ' 

Comment,  in  Osee   Lib.    II. 
Cap.  VII.  8,  lo. 
(Oft  quoted.) 
Ibid.  Cap.  X.  Vers.  14. 
"Beata   sterilis  immaculata 
quae  non  cognovit  cubile  in  pec- 
cato. ' ' 


Sap.  IV.  8. 

(Oft  quoted.) 

Sap.  III.  13. 

"Maledicta  creatura  eorum, 
quoniam  felix  est  sterilis,  et  in- 
coinquinata,  quae  nescivit  tho- 
rum  in  delicto, ' '  etc. 

Sap.  III.  16. 

**Filii  autem  adulterorum  in 
inconsummatione  erunt,  et  ab 
iniquo  thoro  semen  extermina- 
bitur. ' ' 

He  quotes  again  Sap.  VI.  7.  in  Lib.  III.  Cap.  XI.  Vers. 
8  and  9. 


Ibid. 

"Ex  iniquo  enim  concubitu 
semen  peribit. ' ' 


Dan.  XIII.  56. 

"Et,  amoto  eo,  jussit  venire 
alium,  et  dixit  ei:  Semen  Cha- 
naan  et  non  Juda,  species  de- 
cepit  te,  et  concupiscentia  sub- 
vertit  cor  tuum — . ' ' 

Eccli.  XVI.  19. 

" — montes  simul,  et  colles, 
et  fundamenta  terrae ;  cum  con- 
spexerit  ilia  Deus,  tremore  con- 
cutientur. ' ' 


Ibid.  Cap.  XII.  Vers.  7,  8. 
' '  Semen  Chanaan  et  non  Ju- 
da, species  decepit  te. ' ' 


Comment,  in  Amos,  Lib.  II. 
Cap.  IV.  Vers.  12,  13. 

"Iste  est  qui  firmat  tonit- 
ruum,  sive  montes  confirmat, 
ad  cujus  vocem  ccBlorum  card- 
ines  et  terroB  fundamenta  qua- 
tiuntur. '  * 


In  Lib.  III.  Cap.  VI.  Vers.  7  et  seqq.,  he  quotes  again 
Sap.  VI.  7. 

Ibid.  Vers.  12  he  repeats  Esther  XIV.  II. 

Eccli.  XV.  9.  Ibid.  Cap.  V.  Vers.  25. 

' '  Non  est  speciosa  laus  in  ore  * '  — quia  non  est  pulchra  lau- 

peccatoris. ' '  datio  in  ore  peccatoris. ' ' 


THE    CANON    OF   THE   IV.  CENTURY 


459 


Tob.  XIV.  5-6  (juxta  LXX.) 
"Magnopere  autem  senuit: 
et  vocavit  filium  suum  et  filios 
ejus,  et  dixit  ei:  fili,  accipe  filios 
tuos:  ecce  senui,  et  ad  exeun- 
dum  e  vita  sum:  abi  in  Mediam, 
fili,  quoniam  credidi  quaecum- 
que  locutus  est  Jonas  Propheta 
de  Ninive  quia  subvertetur. ' ' 


In  Jonam,  Prologus. 

"Liber  quoque  Tobiae,  licet 
non  habeatur  in  Canone,  ta- 
men  quia  usurpatur  ab  Ecclesi- 
asticis  viris,  tale  quid  memorat, 
dicente  Tobia  ad  filium  suum: 
'  Fili,  ecce  senui,  et  in  eo  sum  ut 
revertar  de  vita  mea:  toUe  filios 
meos,  et  vade  in  Mediam;  fili, 
scio  enim  quae  locutus  est  Jonas 
propheta  de  Ninive,  quoniam 
subvertetur.'  " 

When  Jerome  speaks  of  the  Canon,  he  evidently  means 
the  collection  of  the  Jews.  He  clearly  testifies  here  that 
tradition  favored  Tobias,  although  it  was  not  received  by 
the  Jews,  and  he  is  disposed  to  give  a  certain  reverence  to  the 
book  on  account  of  its  use  by  the  Fathers. 


Judith  XVI.  3. 
' '  Dominus    conterens    bella, 
Dominus  nomen  est  illi. ' ' 


Eccli.  XX.  31. 

"Xenia  et  dona  excaecant 
oculos  judicum,  et  quasi  mutus 
in  ore  avertit  correptiones  eo- 
rum." 


Eccli.  VI.  7. 

"Si  possides  amicum,  in  ten- 
tatione  posside  eum, ' '  etc. 

Eccli.  IV.  25. 

"Est  enim  confusio  addu- 
cens  peccatum,  et  est  confusio 
adducens  gloriam  et  gratiam. ' ' 


Comment,  in  Michaeam,Lib. 
I.  Cap.  II.  Vers.  6,  8. 

"Recedente  autem  pace  et 
auxilio  Dei,  quia  restiterant  Do- 
mino, dequodicitur:  'Dominus 
conterens  bella,  Dominus  no- 
men  ei.'  " 

Ibid.  Cap.  III.  Vers.  9  et 
seqq. 

' '  Munera  excaecant  oculos 
etiam  Sapientium,  et  quasi  fre- 
num  in  ore  avertunt  increpatio- 
nem. ' ' 

Ibid.  Lib.  II.  Cap.  VII.  Vers. 
5.  7- 

"Unde  dicitur:  *Si  habes 
amicum,  in  tentatione  posside 
eum.'  " 

Ibid.  Vers.  14  et  seqq  . 
" — et    erunt    in    confusion  e 
quae  ducit  ad  vitam. ' ' 


4^ 


THE   CANON   OF  THE   IV.    CENTURY 


In  Nahum,  Cap.  III.  Vers, 
oft-quoted  sentence  from  Dan. 

Dan.  XIV.  35. 

*  *  Et  apprehendit  eum  Angel- 
us  Domini  in  vertice  ejus,  et 
portavit  eum  capillo  capitis  sui, 
posuitque  eum  in  Baby  lone  su- 
pra lacum  in  impetu  spiritus 
sui." 

Eccli.  I.  2. 

(Already  quoted.) 


Eccli.  XX.  32. 

"Sapientia  absconsa  et  the- 
saurus invisus:  quas  utilitas  in 
utrisque  ? ' ' 

Dan.  XIII.       56. 

"Et,  amoto  eo,  jussit  venire 
alium,  et  dixit  ei:  Semen  Cha- 
naan,  et  non  Juda, ' '  etc. 


Sap.  VI.  7. 

(Oft  quoted.) 

Eccli.  XXVII.  28. 

"Qui  in  altum  mittit  lapi- 
dem,  super  caput  ejus  cadet:  et 
plaga  dolosa  dolosi  dividet  vul- 
nera. ' ' 


Judith.     Passim. 


8  seqq.,  he  quotes  again  the 
XIII.  56. 

Prologus  in  Habacuc. 

" — Daniel  docere  te  potent, 
ad  quern  in  lacum  leonum  Ha- 
bacuc cum  prandio  mittitur. ' ' 


Comment,  in  Habacuc,  Lib. 
I.  Cap.  III.  Vers.  11,  seqq. 

*  *  Et  pulchre  opinationem 
phantasiae  altitudinem  vocat 
juxta  Jesum  filium  Sirach,  qui 
ait:  'Abyssum  et  sapientiam 
quisinvestigabit?'  " 

Comment,    in    Sophoniam, 
Cap.  II.  Vers.  3,  4. 

" — hoc  est,  alios  doceant: 
*  Sapientia  enim  abscondita 
et  thesaurus  non  comparens, 
quae  utilitas  in  ambobus  ? ' ' 

Ibid.  Vers.  8  et  seqq. 

"Et  ad  presbyteros  cupien- 
tes  sub  figura  Susannae  Eccle- 
siae  corrumpere  castitatem  di- 
cat  Daniel:  'Hoc  est  judicium 
Dei,  Semen  Chanaan  et  non 
Juda.'  " 

Ibid.  Cap.  III.  Vers.  8,  9. 

Ibid.  Vers.  19,  20. 

" — et  de  Jesu  filio  Sirach  tes- 
timonium proferamus:  'Qui 
mittit  lapidem  in  excelsum,  su- 
per caput  suum  mittit.'  " 

Comment,  in  Haggai,  Cap.  I. 
Vers.  5,  6. 

"Similiter  qui  penitus  non 
bibit,  siti  peribit,  sicut  et  in  Ju- 


THE   CANON  OF   THE   IV.  CENTURY 


461 


Eccli.  IV.  lo. 

"In  judicando  esto  pupillis 
misericors  ut  pater,  et  pro  viro 
matri  illorum — . '  * 


Sap.  I.  2. 

" — quoniam  invenitur  ab  his 
qui  non  tentant  ilium:  apparet 
autem  eis,  qui  fidem  habent  in 
ilium—. ' ' 

Sap.  IX.  15. 

"Corpus  enim,  quod  corrum- 
pitur  aggravat  animam,  et  ter- 
rena  inhabitatio  deprimit  sen- 
sum  multa  cogitantem. ' ' 

Maccab.  Passim. 


Sap.  I.  14. 

"Creavit  enim,  ut  essent  om- 
nia: et  sanabiles  fecit  nationes 
orbis  terrarum :  et  non  est  in  il- 
lis  medicamentum  exterminii, 
nee  inferorum  regnum  in 
terra.'' 

Sap.  IX.  16-18. 
"Quae    autem  in  caelis  sunt 
quis  investigabit  ?     Sensum  au- 


dith  (si  quis  tamen  vult  librum 
recipere  mulieris)  et  parvuli 
siti  perierunt. ' ' 

Comment,  in  Zachariam,Lib. 
II.   Cap.   VII.  Vers.   8  et 
seqq. 
"Viduam  quoque  et  pupil- 
lum  de  quibus  nobis  praecep- 
tum  est:  *  Esto  pupillis  pater,  et 
pro  viro  matri  eorum,  judicans 
pupillum   et   justificans   vidu- 
am.' " 

Ibid.  Cap.  VIII.  Vers.  21,22. 

"  Appropinquat  enim  Domi- 
nus  his  qui  non  tentant  eum,  et 
ostendit  faciem  suam  his  qui 
non  sunt  increduli. ' ' 

Ibid.  Cap.  IX.  Vers.  15,  16. 
'' — quia  aggravat  terrena  hab- 
it atio  sensum  multa  curan- 
tem. ' ' 

Ibid.  Cap.  X.Vers.i.et  seqq. 

"Ita  felicitas  Maccabaeorum 
tempore  promissa  est,  quando 
sancti  lapides  elevati  sunt  su- 
per terram, ' '  etc. 

Ibid.  Lib.  III.  Cap.  XII. 
Vers  9. 

* '  Unde  in  Sapientia  quae  Sa- 
lomonis  inscribitur  (si  cui  ta- 
men placet  librum  recipere) 
scriptum  reperimus:  'Creavit 
ut  essent  omnia,  et  salutares 
generationes  mundi,  et  non  erit 
eis  venenum  mortiferum.'  " 

Ibid. 

"Et  in  supradicto  volumine 
continetur:  'Quae  in  ccelo  sunt 


462 


THE    CANON   OF   THE   IV.  CENTURY 


tern  tuum  quis  sciet,  nisi  tu  de- 
deris  sapientiam,  et  miseris 
spiritum  sanctum  tuum  de  al- 
tissimis:  et  sic  correctae  sint 
semitae  eorum,  qui  sunt  in 
terris,  et  quae  tibi  placent 
didicerint  homines  ? ' ' 

Sap.  IV.  8. 

*'Senectus  enim  venerabilis 
est  non  diutuma,  neque  anno- 
rum  numero  computata:  cani 
autem  sunt  sensus  hominis. ' ' 

Sap.  VI.  7. 

(Already  quoted.) 

Eccli.  XXV.  12. 

"Beatus,  qui  invenit  ami- 
cum  verum,  et  qui  enarrat  jus- 
titiam  auri  audienti. ' ' 


Sap.  VI.  7. 

(Oft  quoted.) 

Sap.  I.  6. 

"Benignus  est  enim  spiritus 
sapientiae,  et  non  liberabit 
maledicum  a  labiis  suis,  quon- 
iam  renum  illius  testis  est 
Deus,  et  cordis  illius  scrutator 
est  verus,  et  linguae  ejus  audi- 
tor." 


quis  in vestigabit  ?  nisi  quod  tu 
dedisti  sapientiam,  et  Spiritum 
Sanctum  misisti  de  excelsis,  et 
sic  correctae  sunt  semitae  eo- 
rum qui  versantur  in  terra;  et 
quae  tibi  placent  eruditi  sunt 
homines.'  " 

Ibid.  Cap.  XIV.  Vers.  9. 
" — de  quo  scriptum  est:  'Ca- 
ni hominis  sapientia  ejus.'  " 


Comment,  in  Malach.  Cap. 
II.  Vers.  1,2. 

Ibid.  Cap.  III.  Vers.  7.  et 
seqq. 

*' — et  consequetur  illud  de 
quo  scriptum  est:  'Beatus  qui 
in  aures  loquitur  audientium. ' " 

Comment,  in  Evang.  Math. 
Lib.  I.  Cap.  V  .Vers.  13. 
(Oft  quoted.) 

Ibid.  Cap.  VI.  Vers.  7. 
"Deus  enim  non  verborum 
sed  cordis  auditor  est. ' ' 


Judith  V. 

Tob.  IV.  16. 

"Quod  ab  alio  oderis  fieri 
tibi,  vide,  ne  tu  aliquando 
alteri  facias. ' ' 


Ibid.  Cap.  VIII.  Vers.  18. 

Ibid.  Lib.    III.    Cap.    XXI. 

Vers.  28. 
" — hoc  est:  'Quod  tibi  non 
vis  fieri,  alteri  ne  feceris.'  " 


THE  CANON   OF   THE   IV.  CENTURY 


463 


Sap.  XII.  I. 

"O  quam  bonus  et  suavis  est, 
Domine,  spiritus  tuus  in  omni- 
bus. ' ' 

II.  Maccab.  VI.  et^VII.  Pas- 
sim. 


Sap.  XI.  25. 

"Diligis  enim  omnia  quae 
sunt,  et  nihil  odisti  eorum  quae 
fecisti:  nee  enim  odiens  aliquid 
constituisti,  aut  fecisti. ' ' 

Sap.  IX.  15. 

" — corpus  enim,  quod  cor- 
rumpitur,  aggravat  animam, 
et  terrena  inhabitatio  deprimit 
sensum  multa  cogitantem. ' ' 

Eccli.  XXVII.  12. 

"Homo  sanctus  in  sapientia 
manet  sicut  sol;  nam  stultus 
sicut  luna  mutatur. ' ' 

Sap.  VI.  7. 

(Already  quoted.) 

Sap.  I.  II. 

"Custodite  ergo  vos  a  mur- 
muratione,  quae  nihil  prodest, 
et  a  detractione  parcite  linguae, 
quoniam  sermo  obscurus  in  vac- 
uum non  ibit:  os  autem,  quod 
mentitur,  occidit  animam. ' ' 


Comment,  in  Epist.  ad.  Ga- 
latas  Lib.  I.  Cap.  III.  2. 

" — de  quo   (Spiritu  Sancto) 
alibi    scribitur:    'Incorruptus 
Spiritus  est  in  omnibus.'  *  ' 

Ibid.  Lib.  II  Cap.  III.  14.  ' 
"Eleazarus  quoque  nonage- 
narius  sub  Antiocho  rege  Syriae, 
et  cum  septem  filiis  gloriosa 
mater,  utrum  maledictos  eos 
aestimaturi  fuerint,  an  omni 
laude  dignissimos  ? ' ' 

Comment,  in  Epist.  ad  Ephe- 
sios  Lib.  I.  Cap.  I.  6. 

"Dicitur  quippe  ad  Deum: 
'Diligis  omnia,  et  nihil  abjicis 
eorum  quae  fecisti.  Neque 
enim  odio  quid  habens  condi- 
disti.'  " 

Ibid.  Lib.  11.  Cap.  IV.  2. 

"  Corruptible  enim  corpus 
aggravat  animam,  et  terrenum 
hoc  tabemaculum  sensum  op- 
primit  multa  curantem.'  " 

Ibid.  4. 

" — neque  in  morem  stulti 
quasi  luna  mutetur. ' ' 

Ibid.  Lib.  III.  Cap.  V.  30. 

Breviarium  in  Psalmos,  Ps. 

IV. 
"Os  enim  quod  mentitur  oc- 
cidit animam. ' ' 


464 


THE   CANON   OF   THE  IV.  CENTURY 


Sap.  VII.  27. 

"Et  cum  sit  una,  omnia  po- 
test, et  in  se  permanens  omnia 
innovat,  et  per  nationes  in  ani- 
mas  sanctas  se  transfert;  ami- 
cos  Dei  et  prophetas  consti- 
tuit. ' ' 

Eccli.  I.  16. 

"Initium,  sapientiae  timor 
Domini, ' '  etc. 

Maccab.     Passim. 


Ibid.  Ps.  IX. 

"  Et  alibi  (ipse  Deus  ait) :  An- 
ima  justi  sedes  sapientiae. ' ' 


Eccli.  XXVII.  12. 

' '  Homo  sanctus  in  sapientia 
manet  sicut  sol;  nam  stultus 
sicut  luna  mutatur. ' ' 

Eccli.  XIV.  18. 

"Omnis  caro  sicut  foenum 
veterascet,  et  sicut  folium  fruc- 
tificans  in  arbore  viridi. ' ' 

Eccli.  X.  9. 

"Avaro  autem  nihil  est  sce- 
lestius.  Quid  superbit  terra  et 
cinis?" 

Eccli.  III.  17. 

" — et  in  justitia  aedificatur 
tibi,  et  in  die  tribulationis  com- 
memorabitur  tui,  et  sicut  in 
sereno  glacies  solventur  peccata 
tua. ' ' 

Sap.  I.  II. 

(Already  quoted.) 


Ibid.  Ps.  XXXIII. 
"Ut  illud:   'Initium  sapien- 
tiae, timor  Domini.'  " 

Ibid. 

'  *  Filii  Maccabaeorum  vel 
modo  unusquisque  sanctus 
clamaverunt,  et  illos  et  modo 
unumquemque  ex  omnibus 
tribulationibus  liberat. ' ' 

Ibid.  Ps.  LXVII. 
"Insipiens  enim   sicut  luna 
mutatur. ' ' 


Ibid.  Ps.  LXXXIII. 

'  *  Ilia  autem  caro  de  qua  dici- 
tur:  Omnis  caro  foenum,  non 
desiderat  Dominum. ' ' 

Ibid.  Ps.  CXII. 

"Quia  de  terra  et  putredine 
peccatorum  nostrorum  erexit 
nos,  ut  illud:  'Quid  superbis, 
pulvis  et  terra?' — fiat  nobis 
illud  quod  scrip tum  est:  'Si- 
cut glacies  in  sereno  solvuntur 
peccata  tua. ' ' 


Ibid.  Ps.  CXIX. 
** — nostras  interficimus  ani- 
mas    quod     mentimur:       *0s 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY  465 

enim     quod    mentitur  occidit 
animam. ' '  * 

Liber  De  Expositione  Psalm- 
Sap.  VIII.  2.  onim,  Ps.  CXXVII. 
"Hanc  amavi,  et  exquisivi  a          "Dicit  Salomon  quia  volue- 
juventute  mea,etquaesivispon-     rit  sapientiam  ducere  scilicet 
sam  mihi  eam  assumere,  et  am-     sponsam. ' ' 
ator  f actus  sum  formae  illius. '  * 

These  are  the  quotations  which  a  cursory  examination  of 
Jerome's  works  reveals.  We  see  in  them  that  he  quoted 
with  great  frequency  the  deuterocanonical  books  as  divine 
Scripture. 

Three  causes  are  usually  assigned  for  the  doubts  that  pre- 
vailed among  some  Fathers  concerning  the  deuterocanonical 
books. 

I. — Disputations  between  Jew  and  Christian  were  fre- 
quent in  those  days.  The  chief  intellectual  adversaries  of 
the  Church  during  the  fourth  and  fifth  centuries,  were  Jews, 
and  the  works  of  the  Fathers  of  this  period  are  filled  with 
refutations  of  their  attacks.  As  the  Jews  rejected  the  deu- 
terocanonical books,  the  Fathers  were  obliged  to  draw  Scrip- 
tural materials  from  the  protocanonical  writings.  Hence, 
gradually  these  were  preferred  in  authority  to  the  deutero- 
canonical books ;  and,  as  they  furnished  all  that  was  needed 
from  a  source  accepted  by  both  sides,  the  deuterocanonical 
works  were  often  given  a  secondary  place,  and  sometimes 
left  out  altogether. 

2. — A  second  cause  is  found  in  Origen's  critical  edition  of 
the  Hexapla.  In  this  work,  which  we  shall  describe  more 
fully  in  the  progress  of  this  work,  Origen  compared  the  Sep- 
tuagint  text  with  the  Hebrew  and  other  Greek  texts,  then 
existing,  marking  the  passages  which  were  in  the  Septua- 
gint,  and  not  found  in  the  Hebrew  by  an  6^€\6<;,  Copies 
made  from  this  text,  reproducing  the  diacritic  points,  soon 
filled  the  East.  Now  the  Alexandrian  grammarians  were 
wont  to  use  the  offeXo^;^  to  denote  a  spurious  passage.  Orig- 
en's intention  was  evidently  not  to  brand  these  books  and 
fragments  as  spurious,  but  the  error  arose  in  the  East  especi- 
ally to  distrust  what  was  denoted  by  this  sign. 

(30)  H.S. 


466  THE  CANON  OF  THE  VI.  CENTURY 

3.— Finally,  the  fourth  and  fifth  centuries  were  an  age 
fertile  in  heresies,  apocryphal  productions,  absurd  fables, 
and  fictitious  revelations,  and  in  their  caution  against  what 
was  spurious,  the  Fathers  sometimes  erred  in  slowness  to 
receive  those  books  which  have  in  their  favor  all  the  evidence 
that  is  necessary,  and  that  we  have  a  right  to  expect.  It 
was  by  them  judged  safer  to  refuse  the  quality  of  canonicity 
to  an  inspired  book,  than,  by  excessive  credulity,  to  approve 
an  Apocryphal  work.  These  causes  operated  principally  in 
the  East,  and  thence  the  most  of  the  opposition  came.  The 
status  of  the  deuterocanonical  books  might  be  compared 
to  the  growi;h  of  a  healthy  tree.  It  lost  now  and  then 
a  branch,  in  whose  stead  it  acquired  new  ones,  and  grew 
to  perfection  because  there  was  in  it  a  Divine  vigor, 
which  came  not  from  the  branches,  nor  was  impaired  by  their 
occasional  dropping  off.  There  never  was  any  conflict 
between  the  Fathers  on  this  point,  for  in  practice,  they  were 
a  unit.  The  lists  they  drew  up  were  mere  disciplinary 
opinions,  which  never  entered  to  change  their  practical  use  of 
the  Scripture. 

We  find  at  first  the  most  doubt  in  the  East.  This  line  of 
thought  was  brought  into  the  West  by  Jerome ;  and  while  the 
doubt  gradually  passed  away  in  the  East,  we  find  the  in- 
fluence of  Jerome,  in  the  subsequent  centuries,  engendering 
some  doubts  in  the  minds  of  Fathers  and  theologians  of  the 
Westen  Catholic  world.  We  shall  pass  in  brief  review  the 
centuries  from  the  fifth  down  to  the  Council  of  Trent. 

Chapter  IX. 

The  Canon  of  the  Old  Testament  from  the  End  of 
THE  Fifth  Century  to  the  End  of  the 
Twelfth  Century. 

The  Hexaplar  version  of  Syriac  Scriptures  made  by 
Paul  of  Telia,  in  616,  contains  all  the  deuterocanonical 
works. 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  VI.  CENTURY  467 

DiONYSius,  sumamed  the  Little,  approved  the  catalogue 
of  Scriptures  promulgated  by  the  Council  of  Carthage  in  419, 
which  embraced  all  the  deuterocanonical  works.* 

Cassiodorus,  writing  for  his  monks  a  sort  of  introduc- 
tion to  the  Holy  Scriptures,  sets  forth  three  catalogues  of 
Holy  Books.t 

The  first  list  is  that  of  Prologus  Galeatus,  the  helmeted 
prologue  of  Jerome.  The  second  list  is  the  Canon  of  St. 
Augustine  from  his  Doctrina  Christiana,  which  we  have 
already  reproduced  in  full.  The  third  list  of  Cassiodorus 
is  identical  with  the  catalogue  of  the  Vulgate,  except  a  slight 
variation  in  the  order  of  the  books. 

Cassiodorus  was  more  reverential  than  critical.  He 
plainly  received  all  the  deuterocanonical  books,  and  failed 
to  see  any  repudiation  of  them  in  the  celebrated  Prologue  of 
Jerome.  He  certainly  can  be  claimed  as  a  witness  of  a  tra- 
dition in  the  sixth  century,  which  accorded  to  the  deutero- 
canonical books  the  quality  of  divinity. 

It  is  evident  that,  in  the  East,  in  the  sixth  and  seventh 
centuries,  the  deuterocanonical  books  were  held  to  be  can- 
onical, since  the  schismatic  churches  of  the  Chaldean  Nestor- 

*Dionysius,  surnatned  the  Little,  on  account  of  his  low  stature,  was  a 
native  of  Scythia.  He  came  to  Rome,  and  was  abbot  of  a  monastery  in 
that  city.  He  was  the  inventor  of  the  mode  of  reckoning  the  years  of  the 
Christian  era  since  the  birth  of  Christ,  which  method  is  erroneous  by  sev- 
eral years.  He  is  the  author  of  a  "Codex  Canonum"  and  other  minor 
works.     His  death  is  placed  about  the  year  540,  in  the  reign  of  Justinian, 


*Flavius  Magnus  Aurelius  Cassiodorus  Senator  belonged  to  a  family 
most  probably  of  Syrian  origin,  who  were  established  at  Scylaceum  in 
Bruttium  in  the  fifth  century.  His  father  was  administrator  of  Sicily  in 
489,  when  Theodoric  took  Italy,  and  he  filled  high  positions  under  Theo- 
doric.  Cassiodorus  was  bom  about  490  or  perhaps  a  little  later.  He 
filled  important  public  offices  under  the  Gothic  sovereigns,  Theodoric 
Athalaric,  Theodahat  and  Witiges.  About  the  year  537,  Cassiodorus 
renounced  his  public  charges  and  retired  to  the  Monasterium  Vivariense, 
founded  by  himself  at  Scylaceum,  where  he  devoted  his  life  to  study  and 
prayer.  His  death  is  placed  about  the  year  583 .  He  was  a  prolific  writer. 
He  devoted  much  time  to  Scriptural  studies,  and  gave  thought  that  the 
monks  of  Vivarium  should  have  good  texts  of  Scripture.  The  monastery 
possessed  an  excellent  library  and  many  choice  manuscripts.  Many 
excellent  manuscript  texts  of  the  Vulgate  of  Jerome  were  copied  by  the 
monks  of  Cassiodorus,  and  spread  through  the  world. 


468  THE  CANON  OF  THE  VI.  CENTURY 

ians,  the  Jacobite  Monophysites,  Syrians,  Ethiopians, 
Armenians  and  Copts,  all  have  the  deuterocanonical  Scrip- 
tures in  equal  place  with  the  other  divine  books.* 

It  is  needless  to  attend  to  the  absurd  catalogue  of  Junil- 
ius  Africanus,  an  obscure  bishop  of  Africa  in  the  sixth  cen- 
tury. This  list  places  Chronicles,  Job,  and  Ezra  with  Tobias, 
Judith,  Esther,  and  Maccabees  among  the  non-canonical 
books,  t 

His  opinion  represents  the  tradition  of  no  church  or  sect, 
nor  is  it  found  in  any  writer  of  note,  and  is  rejected  by  every- 
body. 

An  unfavorable  testimony  is  found  in  the  work  "De  Sec- 
tis"  of  Leontius  of  Byzantium,  a  priest  of  Constantinople  in 
the  sixth  century.  He  drew  up  a  canon  of  only  the  pro- 
tocanonical  books  excepting  Esther,  and  declared  that, 
*  'these  are  the  books  which  are  held  canonical  in  the  Church." 
Leontius  lived  many  years  in  the  monastery  of  St.  Saba, 
near  Jerusalem,  and  the  ideas  of  the  Church  of  Jerusalem  are 
reflected  in  his  works.  It  can  be  said  of  him,  as  of  Cyril, 
that  exclusion  from  canonicity  was  not  with  him  exclusion 
from  divinity.  With  them  the  divine  books  of  the  Old 
Testament  were  arranged  in  two  classes  canonical  and  non- 
canonical.  They  used  the  latter  as  divine  Scripture  without 
according  them  the  pre-eminence  of  canonicity.  Leontius 
used  in  several  places  quotations  from  deuterocanonical 
works  as  divine  Scripture. 

The  opponents  of  our  thesis  cite  at  this  juncture  St. 
Gregory  the  Great.! 

*Assemanni.  Bibliotheca  Orientalis,  III. 


tjtinil.  Afric.  De  part.  div.  Legis  I.  3-7.     Migne  68,  16  et  seqq. 


JSt.  Gregory,  suniamed  the  Great,  was  bom  of  an  illustrious  Roman 
family,  and  was  praetor  of  Rome  in  573.  Despising  the  inanity  of  worldly 
grandeur,  he  retired  into  a  monastery  which  he  had  built  under  the  patron- 
age of  St.  Andrew.  Pope  Pelagius  II,  drew  him  from  his  retreat  and  made 
him  one  of  the  seven  deacons  of  Rome.  He  then  sent  him  as  Nuncio  to 
Constantinople,  to  implore  the  succour  of  Tiberius  II.  against  the  Lom- 
bards. At  his  return,  he  was  made  secretary  to  Pelagius.  After  Pelagius' 
death,  by  tmanimous  consent  of  people  and  clergy,  he  was  created  Pope. 
He  strove  to  avoid  the  papal  dignity,  but  in  vain ;  he  was  created  Pope  in 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  VI.  CENTURY  .         469 

In  the  Moral  Treatises  XIX.  21,  citing  a  passage  from 
Maccabees,  he  prefaces  the  citation  by  saying:  ''We  shall 
not  act  rashly,  if  we  accept  a  testimony  of  books,  which, 
although  not  canonical,  have  been  published  for  the  edifica- 
tion of  the  Church." 

In  the  phraseology  of  St.  Gregory  canonical  signified 
something  over  and  above  divine.  It  signified  those  books 
concerning  which  the  whole  world,  with  one  accord,  united 
in  proclaiming  the  word  of  God.  The  other  books  were 
divine, were  used  as  sources  of  divine  teaching  by  the  Church, 
but  there  was  lacking  the  authoritative  decree  of  the  Church 
making  them  equal  to  the  former  in  rank.  The  Jews  of  old 
made  such  distinction  regarding  the  Law  and  the  Hagio- 
grapha.  All  came  from  God,  but  the  Law  was  pre-eminent. 
The  influence  of  St.  Jerome  was  strong  upon  St.  Gregory. 
The  tradition  of  the  Church  drew  him  with  it  to  use  freely, 
as  divine  Scripture,  the  deuterocanonical  books;  while  the 
doubts  of  Jerome  moved  him  to  hesitate  in  his  critical 
opinion  to  accord  to  these  books  a  prerogative  of  which 
Jerome  doubted.  Had  the  Church  not  settled  the  issue 
in  the  Council  of  Trent,  there  would,  doubtless,  be  many 
Catholics  yet  who  would  refuse  to  make  equal  the  books  of 
the  first  and  second  Canons.  Christ  established  a  Church 
to  step  in  and  regulate  Catholic  thought  at  opportune  times, 
and  her  aid  was  needed  in  settling,  once  for  all,  the  discus- 
sion of  the  Canon  of  Scripture.  This  isolated  doubt  from  St. 
Gregory  reflects  merely  a  critical  opinion,  biased  by  Greg- 
ory's esteem  for  St.  Jerome.  To  show  what  was  St. 
Gregory's  opinion  as  a  witness  of  tradition,  we  need  only 
examine  the  following  references : 

590.  His  reign  was  characterized  by  great  ability  and  holiness.  He,  by 
divine  aid,  checked  a  pestilence  that  ravaged  Rome,  extinguished  the 
schism  of  the  Three  Chapters,  evangelized  England  through  means  of  St. 
Austin,  reformed  the  divine  office,  reformed  the  clergy,  checked  the  am- 
bition of  the  Patriarchs  of  Constantinople,  and  upheld  the  rights  of  the 
Holy  See.  Gregory  died  in  604.  His  principal  writings  are  his  Moral 
Treatises,  his  Dialogues,  and  exegetical  Treatises  on  Holy  Scripture.  He 
had  more  piety  than  learning,  and  his  exegesis  is  excessively  mystic. 


470  .     THE   CANON 

Eccli.  II.  14. 
Eccli.  II.  16. 
Sap.  I.  7. 
Eccli.  XXIV.  8. 
Eccli.  XXXII.  26. 
Eccli.  XI.  27. 
Sap.  XII.  15. 
Eccli.  IV.  24. 

Eccli.  XXI.  I. 
Eccli.  II.  I. 
Eccli.  I.  ss. 
Sap.  IX.  15. 
Sap.  IX.  16. 
Sap.  IV.  II. 
Eccli.  V.  4. 
Sap.  IX.  15. 
Sap.  VII.  26. 
Sap.  XII.  18. 
Sap.  II.  24. 
Sap.  V.  21. 
Sap.  XVI.  20. 
Tobias  IV.  16. 
Eccli.  XII.  8. 
Eccli.  II.  16. 
Sap.  XI.  24. 


OF   THE   VI.  CENTURY 

Com.  on  Job.  Bk.  I.  36 

Ibid.  55. 

Ibid.  Bk.  11.  20. 

Ibid. 

Ibid.  Bk.  III.  13. 

Ibid.  16. 

Ibid.  26. 

Comment,  on  Job,   Bk.   IV 
32. 

Ibid.  39, 

Ibid.  42, 

Ibid.  61 

Ibid.  68. 

Ibid.  Bk.  V.  12. 

Ibid.  34. 

Ibid.  35, 

Ibid.  58. 

Ibid.  64, 

Ibid.  78, 

Ibid.  85 

Ibid.  Bk.  VI.  14. 

Ibid.  22. 

Ibid.  54. 

Ibid.  Bk.  VII.  29. 

Ibid.  45. 

Ibid.  Bk.  VIII.  31, 


THE   CANON 
Sap.  IX.  15. 
Eccli.  XXXIV.  7. 
Sap.  IX.  15. 
Eccli.  XL.  I. 
Sap.  V.  6. 
Eccli.  I.  13. 
Sap.  II.  12. 
Eccli.  VII.  40. 
Sap.  VI.  7  et  9. 
Tob.  IV   16. 
Eccli.  VII.  15. 
Eccli.  I.  13. 
Eccli.  XXXIV.  2. 
Sap.  III.  2 
Sap.  XII.  18. 
Sap.  XVII.  10. 
Eccli.  XI.  27. 
Eccli.  X.  15. 
Eccli.  XXII.  2. 
Sap.  I.  4. 
Eccli.  III.  22. 
Sap.  IX.  15. 
Eccli.  XXII.  6. 
Sap.  I.  II. 
Sap.  V.  8,  9. 
Eccli.  II.  5. 


OF   THE   VI.  CENTURY 
Ibid.  12. 

Ibid.  42. 

Ibid.  50. 

Ibid.  55. 

Ibid.  76. 

Ibid.  88. 

Ibid.  Bk.  IX.  89. 

Ibid.  92. 

Ibid.  98. 

Ibid.  Bk.  X.  8. 

Ibid.  28. 

Ibid.  35. 

Ibid.  Bk.  XI.  68. 

Ibid.  Bk.  XII.  6 

Ibid.  14. 

Ibid.  46. 

Ibid.  Bk.  XIII.  48. 

Ibid.  Bk.  XIV.  19. 

Ibid.  Bk.  XV.  5. 

Ibid.  9. 

Ibid.  Bk.  XVI.  8. 

Ibid.  Bk.  XVII.  39. 

Ibid.  Bk.  XVIII.  2. 

Ibid.  5. 

Ibid.  29. 

Ibid.  40. 


471 


472  THE   CANON   OF 

Eccli.  XXXVIII.  25. 

Sap.  IX.  15. 

Eccli.  XV.  3 

Sap.  IV.  8,  9. 

I.  Maccab.  VI.  46. 

Eccli.  XXX.  24. 

Eccli.  XIV.  5. 

Sap.  XII.  18. 

Eccli.  V.  4- 

Sap.  IX.  15. 

Eccli.  II.  II,  12. 

Eccli.  IV.  18,  19. 

Eccli.  I.  13. 

Eccli.  XVIII.  15,  17. 

Eccli.  XX.  32. 

Sap.  VII.  15. 

Eccli.  X.  15. 

Sap.  III.  5. 

Eccli.  II.  I. 

Sap.  III.  7. 

Eccli.  XXXII.  I. 

Sap.  VI.  5. 

Eccli.  V.  4. 

Sap.  XIIL  5. 

Sap.  VI.  17. 


THE   VI.  CENTURY 
Ibid.  68. 
Ibid.  71. 

Ibid.  Bk.  XIX.  9. 
Ibid.  26. 
Ibid.  34. 
Ibid.  38. 
Ibid. 
Ibid.  46. 
Ibid. 

Ibid.  Bk.  XX.  8. 
Ibid.  51. 
Ibid. 
Ibid.  56. 

Ibid.  Bk.  XXI.  29. 
Ibid.  Bk.  XXII.  7. 
Ibid.  Bk.  XXIII.  31, 
Ibid.  44. 
Ibid.  52. 

Ibid.  Bk.  XXIV.  27. 
Ibid.  49. 
Ibid.  52. 
Ibid.  54. 

Ibid.  Bk.  XXV.6. 
Ibid.  Bk.  XXVI.  17. 
Ibid. 


THE    CANON   OF   THE  VI.  CENTURY 


473 


Eccli.   III.    22. 

Sap.  IX.  15. 
Sap.  XVII.  10. 
Eccli.  III.  17. 
Sap.  II.  24. 
Sap.  VII.  24. 
Eccli.  V.  7. 
Sap.  IX.  15. 
Eccli.  XV.  9. 
Eccli.  X.  15. 
Sap.  XII.  18. 
Eccli.  X.  15. 
Eccli.  XXIX.  S7, 
Sap.  III.  7. 
Eccli.  V.  6,  7. 
Eccli.  XXI.  10. 
Sap.  V.  6. 
Eccli.  XXVII.  12. 
Eccli.  XXXII.  I. 
Eccli.  X.  9. 

Sap.  II.  8,  9. 

It  is  needless  to  go  through  the  entire  works  of  St.  Greg- 
ory. These  passages,  taken  from  the  books  of  his  Exposi- 
tion of  Job,  are  a  good  specimen  of  his  use  of  deuterocanoni- 
cal  Scripture.  And  no  man  can  say  that  Gregory  considered 
these  books  as  merely  pious  treatises.  He  introduces  his 
frequent  quotations  from  them  by  the  solemn  formulas: 
**It  is  written,"  etc.,  and  oft  declares  them  the  Scripture  of 


Ibid.  27. 

Ibid.  Bk.  XXVII.  45. 

Ibid.   48. 

Ibid.  53. 

Ibid.  Bk.  XXIX.  15. 

Ibid.  24. 

Ibid.  54. 

Ibid.  Bk.  XXX.  15. 

Ibid.  74 

Ibid.  Bk.  XXXI.  87 

Ibid.  Bk.  XXXII.  9. 

Ibid.  II. 

Ibid.  19. 

Ibid.  Bk.  XXXIII.  7. 

Ibid.  23. 

Ibid.  55- 

Ibid.  Bk.  XXXIV.  25, 

Ibid. 

Ibid.  53. 

Ibid. 

Ibid.  55 


474  THE  CANON  OF  THE  VII.  CENTURY 

God.  Gregory  received  the  Scriptures,  where  he  learned  his 
faith,  from  the  Catholic  Church ;  hence,  in  drawing  from  his 
fund  of  Scriptural  knowledge,  he  made  no  distinction  in 
practice  between  the  books  of  the  first  and  second  Canon. 
The  faQt  that  Wisdom  and  Ecclesiasticus  are  most  used  by 
him,  results  from  the  richness  of  their  moral  teaching;  they 
were  adapted  to  his  scope.  Quotations  from  all  the  deu- 
terocanonical  books  except  Judith  and  Baruch  are  found  in 
his  works;  but  the  proving  force  of  these  quotations  covers 
all  these  books,  because  it  gives  evidence  that  he  received  the 
edition  of  Scripture,  in  which  they  all  stood  on  equal  footing. 
The  question  of  canonicity  was  to  him  more  of  a  question  of 
discipline.  He  was  willing  to  receive  all  the  books  since  the 
Church  used  them ;  but  he  did  not  essay  to  decide  the  exact 
degree  of  inspiration  of  the  several  books. 

In  the  seventh  century,  three  celebrated  Fathers  flour- 
ished in  Spain.     First  among  these  is  St.  Isidore  of  Seville.* 

We  find  the  following  valuable  testimony  in  the  sixth 
book  of  the  Etymologies  of  St.  Isidore,  3-9 :  **The  Hebrews, 
on  the  authority  of  Ezra,  receive  twenty-two  books  of  the 
Old  Testament,  according  to  the  number  of  their  letters ;  and 
they  divide  them  into  three  orders.  The  Law,  The  Prophets, 
and  The  Hagiographa.  The  first  order.  The  Law,  is  received 
in  five  books,  of  which  the  first  is  Beresith,  that  is,  Genesis ; 
the  second  is  Veelle  Semoth,  that  is.  Exodus;  the  third  is 
Vaicra,  that  is  Leviticus;  the  fourth  is  Vajedabber,  that  is 
Numbers ;  the  fifth  is  Elle  hadebarim,  that  is  Deuteronomy. 
The  second  order  is  that  of  The  Prophets,  in  which  is  con- 
tained eight  books,  of  which  the  first  is  Josue  ben  Nun, 
which  is  called  in  Latin,  Jesus  Nave;  the  second  is  Sophtim, 

*The  biography  of  Isidore  of  Seville  is  involved  in  obscurity.  His 
father  was  Severianus,  of  the  province  of  Cathagena,  in  Spain.  By  some 
he  is  placed  as  governor  of  that  province,  but  this  is  doubted  by  others. 
The  precise  year  of  Isidore's  birth  is  uncertain,  but  we  know  that  he  was 
Archbishop  of  Seville  for  nearly  forty  years,  and  that  he  died  in  636.  He 
was  undoubtedly  the  greatest  man  of  his  time  in  Spain.  He  was  versed 
in  all  the  learning  of  his  age,  and  was  well  acquainted  with  the  classic  and 
sacred  languages,  Greek,  Latin  and  Hebrew.  The  Council  of  Toledo  in 
653  called  him  the  Doctor  of  his  age  and  the  Ornament  of  the  Church. 

His  works  are  many,  and  embody  all  the  science  of  his  age. 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  VII.  CENTURY  475 

that  is  Judges ;  the  third  is  Samuel,  that  is  the  first  of  Kings ; 
the  fourth  is  Melachim,  that  is  the  second  of  Kings ;  the  fifth 
is  Isaiah;  the  sixth,  Jeremiah;  the  seventh,  Ezechiel;  the 
eighth,  Thereazar,  which  is  called  the  twelve  prophets,  who 
on  account  of  their  brevity  are  joined  to  one  another,  and 
considered  as  one  book.  The  third  order  is  of  the  Hagio- 
graphers,  that  is  the  writers  of  holy  things,  in  which  order 
are  nine  books,  of  which,  the  first  is  Job;  the  second,  the 
Psalter ;  the  third,  Misle,  that  is  the  Proverbs  of  Solomon ;  the 
fourth  is  Coheleth,  that  is  Ecclesiastes ;  the  fifth  is  Sir  Hassi- 
rim,  that  is  the  Canticle  of  Canticles ;  the  sixth  is  Daniel ;  the 
seventh,  Dibre  hajamim,  that  is  the  Words  of  the  Days,  that 
is  Paralipomenon ;  the  eighth  is  Ezra;  the  ninth  is  Esther. 
These  taken  together,  five,  eight,  and  nine,  make  twenty- 
two  books,  as  were  computed  above. 

''Some  enumerate  Ruth,  and  Cinoth  which  is  called  in 
Latin,  the  Lamentations  of  Jeremiah,  with  the  Hagio- 
grapha,  and  make  twenty-four  books,  according  to  the 
twenty-four  Ancients,  who  assist  before  the  Lord. 

' '  There  is  a  fourth  order  with  us  of  those  books  of  the  Old 
Testament,  which  are  not  in  the  Hebrew  Canon.  The  first  of 
these  is  Wisdom ;  the  second,  Ecclesiasticus ;  the  third,  Tobias ; 
the  fourth,  Judith ;  the  fifth  and  sixth,  the  Maccabees.  Although 
the  Jews  separate  these  and  place  them  among  the  Apocrypha, 
the  Church  of  Christ  honors  them  and  promulgates  them  as 
divine  books.''  In  this  list  Baruch  is  not  explicitly  men- 
tioned, being  considered  a  part  of  Jeremiah. 

In  his  treatise  De  Ecclesiasticis  Officiis,  Bk.  I.  XL  4,  5,  7, 
St.  Isidore  writes  thus :  *'In  the  first  place,  the  books  of  the 
Law,  that  is  of  Moses,  are  five.  Genesis,  Exodus,  Leviticus, 
Numbers,  and  Deuteronomy.  Sixteen  historical  books  fol- 
low thcvse,  viz.,  Jesus  Nave,  Judges,  Ruth,  four  books  of 
Kings,  two  of  Paralipomenon,  two  of  Ezra,  Tobias,  Esther, 
Judith,  and  the  two  books  of  Maccabees.  Then  ihere  are  six- 
teen prophetical  books,  Isaiah,  Jeremiah,  Ezechiel,  Daniel, 
and  the  twelve  minor  Prophets.  After  these  come  eight 
books  in  verse,  which  are  written  in  various  kinds  of  metre 
in  Hebrew.  They  are  Job,  the  Psalms,  Proverbs,  Ecclesi- 
astes, the  Canticle  of  Canticles,  the  Book  of  Wisdom,  Ecclesi- 


476  THE  CANON  OF  THE  VII.  CENTURY 

asticus,  and  the  Lamentations  of  Jeremiah,  and  thus  there 

are  made  up  forty-five  books  of  the  Old  Testament 

These  are  the  seventy-two  canonical  books,  and  on  this  account 
Moses  elected  the  elders,  who  should  prophesy.  For  this 
cause,  the  Lord  Jesus  sent  seventy-two  disciples  to  preach." 

The  number  here  agrees  with  the  number  of  the  Council 
of  Trent,  but  there  is  a  slight  variation,  in  that  St.  Isidore 
considers  Baruch  a  part  of  Jeremiah,  and  detaches  Lamenta- 
tions as  a  separate  book.  Excepting  this  slight  variation, 
the  testimony  of  Isidore  well  represents  the  belief  of  the 
Church  of  his  age.  The  first  testimony  quoted  also  explains 
the  writings  of  preceding  Fathers,  in  constituting  a  two- 
fold order  of  books  of  the  Old  Testament :  those  that  were 
in  the  Canon  of  the  Hebreivs,  and  those  that  were  not,  but 
which  by  the  Church  were  honored  and  promulgated  as  divine 
books.  The  first  w^ere  often  called  by  the  Fathers  the  can- 
onical books  of  the  Old  Testament,  and  in  excluding  the 
deuterocanonical  works  from  this  order,  they  left  them  in 
the  second  order  of  Isidore. 

In  his  prologue  to  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament,  I.  7,  8, 
we  find  the  following:  "Of  these  (the  historical  books),  the 
Hebrews  do  not  receive  Tobias,  Judith,  and  Maccabees,  but 
the  Church  ranks  them  among  the  Canonical  Scriptures. 
Then  follow  also  those  two  great  books — ^books  of  holy 
teaching,  Wisdom  and  Ecclesiasticus ;  which,  although  they 
are  said  to  be  w^ritten  by  Jesus  the  son  of  Sirach,  neverthe- 
less, on  account  of  the  similarity  of  diction,  are  called  of 
Solomon.  And  these  are  acknowledged  to  have,  in  the 
Church,  equal  authority  w4th  the  other  Canonical  Scrip- 
tures." 

St.  Isidore  does  not  represent  tradition,  when  he  states 
that  Wisdom  is  said  to  be  the  work  of  Sirach.  He  was  there 
explaining  a  fact,  and  had  only  the  warrant  of  his  ow^n  criti- 
cal knowledge  on  which  to  rely;  but  the  fact  itself  he  re- 
ceived from  the  Church,  and  this  was  that  the  Church  of  his 
day  made  equal  those  books  that  she  afterwards  proclaimed 
equal  by  solemn  decree  in  the  Council  of  Trent. 

The  second  witness  for  the  Church  of  Spain,  in  St.  iLDfi- 
FONSUS,  the  disciple  of  St.  Isidore,  afterward  Archbishop  of 


THE   CANON   OF   THE  VIII.    AND   IX.  CENTURIES  477 

Toledo,  who  died  in  669.  In  his  Treatise  on  Baptism,  Chap- 
ter LXXIX.  he  received  the  Canon  of  St.  Augustine,  in  St. 
Augustine's  identical  words,  with  perhaps  the  addition  of  one 
word  to  strengthen  the  authority  of  the  deuterocanonical 
books. 

St.  Eugene,  bishop  of  Toledo,  who  died  in  657,  sets 
forth  the  Canon  of  St.  Isidore  in  Latin  verse.* 

There  is  sometimes  invoked  against  us  the  authority  of 
St.  John  DAmASCENE,  a  priest  of  Damascus,  who  flourished 
about  730  A.  D.  He  has  drawn  up  a  catalogue  of  the  books 
of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments :  concerning  the  former  he 
says :  *' It  is  to  be  observed  that  there  are  twenty-two  books 
of  the  Old  Testament,  according  to  the  letters  of  the  Hebrew 
language."  The  only  deuterocanonical  works  which  he 
mentions  are  Wisdom  and  Ecclesiasticus,  of  which  he  declares 
that  *^they  are  excellent  and  useful,  but  are  not  numbered, 
nor  were  they  placed  in  the  Ark." 

The  Damascene  is  evidently  simply  stating  the  status  of 
the  deuterocanonical  books  with  the  Jews,  and  in  this  he  is 
influenced  by  the  extravagant  ideas  of  St.  Ephrem.  His 
own  judgment  of  the  books  is  set  forth  in  his  declaration 
that  they  are  excellent  and  useful,  and  one  could  legitimately 
make  the  inference  from  his  testimony:  Therefore,  the 
Church  receives  them,  because  they  are  excellent  and  use- 
ful, even  though  not  in  the  Canon  of  the  Jews.  His 
practice  warrants  the  inference,  for  he  quotes  both  Wisdom 
and  Ecclesiasticus  as  divine  Scripture. 

At  the  beginning  of  the  ninth  century  Nicephorus,  Patri- 
arch of  Constantinople,  drew  up  (in  his  Stichometry)  a  cata- 
logue of  books,  which  contains  twenty-two  books.     In  this 

*"Regula  quos  fidei  commendat  noscere  libros, 
Hos  nostra  praisens  bibliotheca  tenet : 
Quinque  priora  gerit  veneranda  volumina  Legis ; 
Hinc  losues,  optimaque  hinc  Ruth  Moabitica  gesta 
Bisbis  Regum  nectuntur  in  ordine  libri 
Atque  bis  octoni  concurrunt  inde  prophetas ; 
En  lob,  Psalterium,  Solomon  et  Verba  dierum, 
Esdrae  consequitur  Esther,  Sapientia,  lesus, 
Tobi  et  ludith ;  concludit  haec  Machabaeorum ; 
Hie  Testamenti  Veteris  finisque  modusque." 


478  THE   CANON    OF  THE   VIII.  AND   IX.  CENTURIES 

list,  Baruch  finds  place,  while  Esther  is  passed  over  in  silence. 
After  the  list  of  the  canonical  books  of  the  Old  and  the  New 
Testaments,  there  is  placed,  a  list  of  avrtXeyo/xeva  which 
comprises  The  Maccabees,  Wisdom,  Ecclesiasticus,  The 
Psalms  of  Solomon,  Esther,  Judith,  Susanna  and  Tobias. 
This  list  has  a  close  afhnity  to  the  Synopsis  of  the  Pseudo- 
Athanasius,  and  is  of  no  worth  in  establishing  the  tradition 
of  the  Church  of  Constantinople,  for  at  that  very  time,  in 
virtue  of  the  decree  of  the  Council  in  Trullo,  the  Canon  of 
the  Carthaginian  Council  was  adopted  by  the  Greek  Church. 
Nicephorus,  like  many  of  his  time,  held  in  great  veneration 
the  ancient  documents,  which  had  been  preserved.  He  most 
probably  reproduced  here  some  old  writing  without  essaying 
to  judge  its  critical  value. 

Photius  has  placed  in  his  Syntagma  Canonum,  the 
eighty-fifth  Canon  of  the  Apostles,  the  sixtieth  Canon  of 
Laodicea,  and  the  twenty-fourth  Canon  of  Carthage.* 

♦Photius,  patriarch  of  Constantinople,  was  descended  from  one  of  the 
most  illustrious  and  richest  families  of  that  city.  His  brother  Sergius 
married  one  of  the  sisters  of  the  Emperor.  Photius  made  use  of  his  splen- 
did advantages  to  acquire  a  vast  and  varied  education.  Bardas,  the 
restorer  of  letters,  was  his  tutor.  Photius  became  eminent  in  all  the 
departments  of  human  knowledge.  His  birth  and  his  talents  elevated 
him  to  the  highest  dignities,  even  to  become  Secretary  of  State  to  the 
Cotirt  of  Constantinople.  After  passing  through  these  civil  posts,  he 
embraced  the  ecclesiastical  state,  and  became  a  great  theologian.  The 
character  of  Photius  was  proud  and  cimning.  By  intrigue,  he  deposed 
Ignatius  the  legitimate  patriarch  of  Constantinople,  and  placed  himself 
on  the  throne.  By  flattery,  he  kept  his  usurped  post  by  favor  of  the 
Emperor  Michael.  By  similar  means,  he  corrupted  the  legates  of  Pope 
Nicolas  I.,  so  that  they  assisted  at  the  Conciliabulum  in  86 1,  and  con- 
firmed Photius  in  the  See.  On  hearing  these  acts.  Pope  Nicolas  declared 
null  and  void  the  said  acts,  and  anathematized  Photius  Photius  in  turn, 
convoked  a  council  at  Constantinople  in  866,  and  pronounced  sentence  of 
deposition  and  excommunication  against  the  Pope.  When  Basil,  the  Mac- 
edonian, succeeded  Michael  in  the  empire,  he  deposed  Photius,  and  restored 
Ignatius.  At  this  juncture  was  celebrated  at  Constantinople  the  VIII. 
(Ecumenical  Council,  in  which  Photius  and  his  partizans  were  anathema- 
tized. Photius  composed  a  chimerical  history,  in  which  he  made  Basil  de- 
scend from  Tiridates,  the  Armenian  King.  Basil  was,  in  fact,  low-bom,  and 
this  coup  won  his  favor  for  Photius,  whom  he  restored  in  877.  Pope  John 
VIII.  deceived  by  Basil,  and  Photius,  at  first  received  him  into  the  com- 
munion of  the  Church  of  Rome,  but  afterwards,  ascertaining  the  falsehood 
of  Photius,  excommunicated  him.     The  successive  Popes,  Martin,  Adrian 


THE    CANON    OF    THE    VIII.  AND    IX.  CENTURIES  479 

From  the  fact  that  he  receives  the  decree  of  the  Council 
of  Carthage,  it  is  evident  that  he  is  at  one  with  us  on  the  ques- 
tion of  the  Canon.  He  evidently  believed  that  the  curtailed 
canons  were  completed  by  the  decree  of  Carthage. 

Even  after  its  defection  from  Rome,  the  Greek  Church 
has  always  received  the  deuterocanonical  books.  To  this 
Zonaras  and  Balsamon  testify.* 

When,  in  the  seventeenth  century,  Cyril  Lucar  endeav- 
ored to  introduce  protestant  ideas  into  the  Greek  Church, 
he  failed  to  expel  from  the  Canon  the  deuterocanonical 
books. t  Against  him  the  members  of  the  Council  of  Jerusa- 
lem decreed  that,  "following  the  rule  of  the  Catholic  Church, 
we  call  Holy  Scripture  all  those  books  which  Cyril  received 
from  the  Council  of  Laodicea,  and  in  addition  those  books 
which  Cyril,  unwisely,  ignorantly,  or  rather  maliciously 
called  Apocryphal,  viz..  Wisdom  of  Solomon,  Judith,  Tobias, 
the  History  of  the  Dragon  (deuterocanonical  fragment  of 
Daniel),  The  History  of  Susanna  (idem),  The  Maccabees, 
and  The  Wisdom  of  Sirach.     We  judge  that  these  should  be 

and  Stephen,  anathematized  him.  It  was  at  this  point  that  Photius 
brought  against  the  Church  of  Rome  the  charge  of  heresy,  in  having  joined 
the  "Filioque"  to  the  Creed.  This  was  the  origin  of  the  Greek  schism, 
which  divided  the  East  from  the  West,  and  drew  from  the  Church  of  Christ 
the  Greek  world  Photius  was  finally  imprisoned  in  a  monastery  by  the 
Emperor  Leo  the  Philosopher;  and  he  died  in  his  retreat  in  891.  Fleury 
gives  a  good  resume  of  the  character  of  Photius  in  these  words:  "He  was 
the  greatest  mind  and  most  learned  man  of  his  time ;  but  he  was,  at  the 
same  time,  a  perfect  hypocrite:  while  acting  like  a  villain,  he  spoke  like  a 
saint."      The  works  of  Photius  are  many,  characterized  by  great  erudition. 


*Zonaras,  and  Balsamon's  Explanation  of  the  Council  in  Trullo,  Chap. 
II.  See  Synod.  Beveregii,  Migne,  137,  524;  138,  122. 


fCyril  Lucar  was  bom  in  the  Isle  of  Candia  in  1572.  He  studied  in 
Venice,  Padua  and  in  Germany;  and  in  the  latter  place  became  imbued 
with  Lutheran  ideas.  He  was  placed  in  the  See  of  Alexandria,  and  after- 
wards in  that  of  Constantinople.  As  it  became  clear  that  he  embraced 
the  tenets  of  Lutheranism,  the  clergy  rose  against  him,  and  he  was  exiled 
to  Rhodes.  He  was  soon  afterwards  restored  to  his  see,  and  subsequently 
for  six  or  seven  times  he  was  deposed  and  restored.  He  was  finally 
strangled,  while  returning  from  exile.  He  had  the  real  qualities  of  a  heretic 
presumption  and  intrigue. 


480         THE  CANON  OF  THE  GREEK  CHURCH 

enumerated  with  the  other  genuine  books  of  Holy  Scripture, 
as  genuine  parts  of  the  same  Scripture."* 

In  the  council  which  Parthenius,  Patriarch  of  Constanti- 
nople held  in  1638  at  Constantinople,  in  which  sat  two  other 
patriarchs  and  one  hundred  and  twenty  bishops,  a  synodical 
letter  was  drawn  up  and  sent  to  the  provincial  synod  con- 
vened at  Jassy,  in  which  the  opinion  of  Cyril  Lucar,  who 
expunged  from  Holy  Scripture  holy  and  canonical  books, 
and  as  such  received  by  the  holy  synods,  is  declared  to  be 
heresy,  breathing  forth  from  all  parts,  and  utterly  contrary 
to  the  orthodox  faith. t  In  later  centuries,  protestant  ideas 
have  invaded  in  some  part  the  Russian  Church  to  the  extent 
that  Philaretes  (ti868)  authorized  the  following  catechismal 
text,  and  this  was  approved  by  the  Synod. 

*'Q.     How  many  are  the  books  of  the  old  Testament? 

A.  St.  Cyril  .of  Jerusalem,  St.  Athanasius  the  Great,  and 
St.  John  Damascene  reckon  them  at  twenty-two;  agreeing 
therein  with  the  Jews,  who  so  reckon  them  in  the  Hebrew 
tongue.  Athanas.  Ep.  XXXIX.  de  Test.  [Fest.];  J.  Damasc. 
Theol.  1.  IV.  c.  17. 

Q.  Why  should  we  attend  to  the  reckoning  of  the 
Hebrews? 

A.  Because,  as  the  Apostle  Paul  says,  unto  them  were 
committed  the  oracles  of  God:  and  the  sacred  books  of  the  Old 
Testament  have  been  received  from  the  Hebrew  Church  of 
that  Testament  by  the  Christian  Church  of  the  New. 

Q.  How  do  St.  Cyril  and  St.  Athanasius  enumerate  the 
Books  of  the  Old  Testament? 

A.  As  follows:  i.  The  book  of  Genesis :  2 .  Exodus:  3. 
Leviticus:  4.  The  book  of  Numbers:  5.  Deuteronomy:  6. 
The  book  of  Jesus  the  son  of  Nun:  7.  The  book  of  Judges, 
and  with  it,  as  an  appendix,  the  book  of  Ruth:  8.  The  first 
and  second  books  of  Kings,  as  tw^o  parts  of  one  book :  9.  The 
third  and  fourth  books  of  Kings:  10.  The  first  and  second 
books  of  Paralipomena :  1 1.  The  first  book  of  Esdras,  and 
the  second,  or,  as  it  is  entitled  in  Greek,  the  book  of  Nehe- 

*  Cfr.  Kimtnel,  Monumenta  Fidei  Orientalis,  Jenae,  1850,  I.  42. 


fKimmel  1.  c,  page  415. 


THE   CANON   OF  ALCUIN  481 

miah:  12.  The  book  of  Esther:  13.  The  book  of  Job:  14. 
The  book  of  Psalms:  15.  The  Proverbs  of  Solomon:  16 
Ecclesiastes,  also  by  Solomon:  17.  The  Songs  of  Songs,  also 
by  Solomon:  18.  The  book  of  the  Prophet  Isaiah:  19.  Of 
Jeremiah :  20.  Of  Ezekiel :  21.  Of  Daniel :  22.  Of  the  twelve 
Prophets. 

Q.  Why  is  no  notice  taken,  in  this  enumeration  of  the 
books  of  the  Old  Testament,  of  the  book  of  Wisdom,  of  the 
Son  of  Sirach,  and  certain  others? 

A.     Because  they  do  not  exist  in  Hebrew. 

Q.     How  are  we  to  regard  these  last  named  books? 

A.  Athanasius  the  Great  says,  that  they  have  been 
appointed  by  the  fathers  to  be  read  by  proselytes,  who  are 
preparing  for  admission  into  the  Church." 

Philaretes  was  a  disciple  of  Cyril  Lucar,  and  introduced 
many  protestant  ideas  into  the  Russian  Church ;  but  in  the 
days  when  the  tradition  of  that  Church  was  worth  aught,  it 
was  not  so.  All  the  Churches  of  the  East  were  in  accord  in 
accepting  the  deuterocanonical  books. 

Up  to  recent  times  the  Codex  Amiatinus,  was  believed 
to  date  back  to  the  miiddle  of  the  sixth  century.  M.  de  Rossi 
has  demonstrated  that  this  manuscript  was  copied  in  the  first 
years  of  the  eighth  century  in  the  Monastery  of  Wearmouth, 
in  Northumberland,  by  the  monks  of  the  Anglo-Saxon 
Ceolfrid.* 

It  was  given  to  Pope  Gregory  II.  in  716.  It  is  considered 
the  finest  Codex  in  all  this  world  of  the  Vulgate  of  St.  Jerome. 
It  contains  all  the  protocanonical  and  deuterocanonical  hooks  ^ 
uniting  Baruch  with  Jeremiah,  and  making  explicit  mention  of 
the  same.  This  is  important  in  proving  force,  since  it  repre- 
sents the  text  of  Scripture  brought  into  England  by  the  mis- 
sionaries of  Gregory  the  Great. 

In  the  first  years  of  the  ninth  century,  Alcuin,  by  order 
of  Charlemagne,  made  an  edition  of  the  Scriptures. f 

*Vide  infra. 


t Alcuin,  sumamed  Flaccus,  was  bom,  towards  the  year  735,  of  a 
noble  Anglo-Saxon  family  in  Northumberland.  His  education  was  placed 
under  the  care  of  Egbert,  Archbishop  of  York,  and  he  had  for  tutor  ^1- 

(31)  H.  S. 


482  THE    CANON    OF   ALCUIN 

The  Codex  Paulinus  or  Carolinus,  preserved  at  the 
Basilica  of  St.  Paul  outside  the  walls  of  Rome,  executed  in 
the  ninth  century,  contains  Alcuin's  recension,  in  which  we 
find  all  the  deuterocanonical  books  except  Baruch.  The  Codex 
Statianus  or  Vallicellianus  in  the  Vallicella  Library  at 
Rome,  and  other  manuscripts  called  the  Bibles  of  Charle- 
magne, at  Zurich,  Bamberg,  and  in  the  British  Museum, 
contain  the  same  list  of  Alcuin's  revised  books.  Moreover, 
Alcuin  has  dra^vn  up  a  complete  Canon  of  both  protocanoni- 
cal  and  deuterocanonical  books  in  the  following  verses ; 

*"In  hoc  quinque  libri,  retinentur  Codice  Mosis, 
Bella  ducis  Josue,  seniorum  et  tempora  patrum, 
Ruth,  Job,  et  Regum  bis  bini  namque  libelli; 
Atque  Prophetarum  sancti  bis  octo  libelli ; 
Carmina  praeclari  Christi  patris  hymnica  David, 
Et  tria  pacifici  Salomonis  opuscula  regis. 
Jungitur  his  Sophias  Jesu  simul  atque  libellus, 
Et  Paralipomenis  enim  duo  nempe  libelli. 
Hinc  Ezras,  Nehemiae,  Hester,  Judith  atque  libelli 
Et  duo  namque  libri  Machabaea  bella  tenentes. 

bert  of  the  ecclesiastical  school  of  York.  Aelbert  took  him  on  a  pilgrimage 
to  Rome,  and,  on  the  return,  visited  with  him  Charlemagne.  Albert  was 
elected  to  the  See  of  York  in  766,  and  thereupon,  placed  Alcuin  director  of 
the  school  of  the  diocese.  Alcuin  held  this  post  till  780.  In  781,  he  was 
sent  to  Rome  to  bear  thence  the  pallium  for  Eanbald,  successor  of  Albert 
in  the  see  of  York.  On  his  return,  he  again  visited  Charlemagne,  who  in- 
vited him  to  fix  his  abode  in  his  dominions.  Having  sought  and  obtained 
the  authorization  of  his  archbishop  and  king,  he  arrived  in  France  in  782, 
and  took  the  post  of  teacher  in  the  royal  school .  Charlemagne  became  his 
pupil,  and,  later  on,  conferred  on  him  the  abbeys  of  Ferrieres,  St.  Loup  de 
Troyes,  St.  Josse  in  Ponthieu,  and  St.  Martin  of  Tours.  In  790,  Alcuin 
revisited  England,  but  Charlemagne  soon  summoned  him  into  France  to 
^combat  the  heresy  of  Adoptionism.  In  opposing  this  heresy,  Alcuin's 
principal  theological  works  were  written.  Towards  796,  Alcuin  retired 
to  St.  Martin  of  Tours,  and  devoted  himself  there  to  teaching,  whereby 
the  school  became  famous.  By  his  orders,  a  rich  library  was  collected, 
and  many  manuscripts  copied.  Alcuin  remained  through  life  a  deacon 
of  the  Catholic  Church.  His  last  years  were  troubled  by  a  dispute  with 
Theodulf,  Bishop  of  Orleans,  regarding  a  priest  who  had  been  condemned 
to  imprisonment  by  Theodulf,  and  who  had  sought  refuge  at  Saint  Martin . 
In  this  affair,  Charlemagne  treated  him  with  severity.  He  died  in  804. 
at  the  age  of  sixty  years,  and  was  interred  in  the  Church  of  St.  Martin. 
He  is  the  author  of  many  works,  mostly  treating  of  scriptural  subjects. 
One  of  the  most  important  of  his  works  was  his  correction  of  the  Bible,  by 
order  of  Charlemagne . 

*P.  L.  Migne,  loi,  pag.  731-734. 


THE   CANON   OF   ALCUIN  483 

Matthasi  et  Marci,  Lucas  liber,  atque  Joannis 
Inclyta  gesta  tenens  salvantis  saecula  Christi. 
Sanctus  Apostolicos  Lucas  conscripserat  Actus; 
Bis  septem  sancti  per  chartas  dogmata  Pauli, 
Jacobi,  Petri,  Judae  et  pia  dicta  Joannis: 
Scribitur  extremo  Joannis  in  ordine  tomus. 
Hos  lege,  tu  lector  felix,  feliciter  omnes, 
Ad  laudem  Christi  propriamque  in  saecla  salutem." 


"Tres  Salomon  libros  mirabilis  edidit  auctor, 

His  duo  junguntur  per  paradigma  libri; 
Quorum  quippe  prior  Sapientia  dicitur  alma, 

Notatur  Jesu  nomine  posterior 
Hinc  Paralipomenonis  adest  sacer  ille  libellus, 

Qui  veteris  Legis  dicitur  epitome 
Hinc  EzrcB  Nehmice,  Judith,  Hesterque  libelli; 

Tunc  Tobiae  pietas,  angelus,  actus,  iter. 
Inclyta  nam  binis  Machabaea  bella  libellis 

Scribuntur,  victis  gentibus  et  populis. 
Haec  est  sancta  quidem  Legis  Scriptura  Vetustae, 

Divinis  tota  quae  titulis  redolet." 

Some  endeavor  to  shake  Alcuin's  authority  for  the  deu- 
terocanonical  books  by  citing  a  passage  from  the  eighteenth 
paragraph  of  his  first  book  against  EHpandus.  This  Elip- 
andus  had  cited,  in  support  of  Adopt ionism,  the  text  from 
Ecclesiasticus  XXXVI.  14:  "Miserere,  Domine,  plebi  tuae, 
super  quam  invocatum  es  nomen  tuum,  et  Israel  quem  cose- 
quasti  primogenito  tuo. "  Alcuin  repHes :  *'In  the  book  of 
Jesus,  the  Son  of  Sirach,  the  aforesaid  sentence  is  read,  of 
which  book  blessed  Jerome  and  Isidore  positively  testify  that 
it  is  placed  among  the  apocryphal,  that  is  to  say,  the  doubt- 
ful books." 

In  relation  to  this  testimony,  we  must  first  observe  that 
Alcuin  errs  in  stating  that  Isidore  placed  Ecclesiasticus 
among  the  Apocrypha.  A  close  examination  of  his  works 
reveals  no  such  statement ;  he  is  a  plain  advocate  of  Ecclesi- 
asticus and  all  the  other  deuterocanonical  works.  We 
know  what  was  the  opinion  of  Jerome,  and  what  were  its 
causes.  The  present  question,  therefore,  is:  did  Alcuin 
adopt  the  opinion  of  Jerome?  We  answer  this  question  in 
the  negative,  on  the  clearest  evidence.  To  say  nothing  of  the 
complete  lists  of  Scripture  in  the  verses  already  quoted,  to 
say  nothing  of  the  recension  of  all  the  books  of  the  Catholic 


484 


THE   CANON   OF  ALCUIN 


Canon,  in  the  edition  prepared  by  Alcuin  for  Charlemagne, 
we  have  clear  and  express  statements  from  Alcuin  that 
Ecclesiasticus  is  divinely  inspired  Scripture.  We  select  the 
following  passages: 


Eccli.  V.  8. 

"Delay  not  to  be  convert- 
ed to  the  Lord,  and  defer  it 
not  from  day  to  day." 


De  Virtutibus  et  Vitiis,  XIV. 
XVIII. 

''The  saying  is  read  in  the 
divinely  inspired  Scriptures, 
'Son,  delay  not  to  be  convert- 
ed to  the  Lord;  because  thou 
knowest  not  what  the  coming 

day  may   bring  forth.' 

These  are  the   words  of  God, 
not  mine." 

In  the  fifteenth  chapter  of  the  same  treatise,  he  quotes 
EcclesiavSticus  three  times  as  authoritative  Scripture.  In 
the  eighteenth  chapter  this  passage  occurs : 


"Eccli.  XVIII.  30—31. 
"Go  not  after  thy  lusts, but 
turn  away  from  thy  own  will. 
If  thou  give  to  thy  soul  her 
desires,  she  will  make  thee  a 
joy  to  thy  enemies." 


De     Virtutibus     et      Vitiis, 

XVIII. 

"Holy  Scripture,  there- 
fore, admonishes  us,  saying." 
'Go  not  after  thy  lusts,  but 
turn  away  from  thy  own  will. 
If  thou  give  to  thy  soul  her 
desires,  she  will  make  thee  a 
joy  to  thy  enemies.' " 

If  words  mean  anything,  Alcuin 's  position  was  that  Eccle- 
siasticus was  divinely  inspired  Scripture,  and  the  word  of 
God.  The  Council  of  Trent  asks  no  more  than  this  for  the 
book.  In  practical  usage  Alcuin  made  no  difference  between 
the  two  classes  of  books.  The  passage  objected  to  by  our 
adversaries  relates  only  to  Ecclesiasticus,  and  we  honestly 
claim  to  have  shown  that  Alcuin  did  not  make  his  own  the 
opinion  of  vSt.  Jerome.  To  reconcile  the  aforesaid  passage 
with  Alcuin 's  real  belief,  we  must  observe  that  it  occurs  in  a 
controversial  work  directed  against  Elipandus,  the  heretical 
Archbishop  of  Toledo.  In  that  treatise,  his  aim  was  to 
obtain  victory  over  his  opponent,  and  to  that  purpose,  he 
was  willing  to  use  every  argument  that  would  have  any 


THE   CANON   OF  THE   VIII.  AND   IX.   CENTURIES  485 

weight,  even  though  it  did  not  express  his  personal  convic- 
tion. EHpandus  had  quoted  a  passage  from  Ecclesiasticus 
that  seemed  to  make  for  Adoptionism.  Alcuin  first  endeav- 
ors to  weaken  the  adversary's  position  by  throwing  the 
doubt  of  St.  Jerome  on  the  book,  and  then  directly  meets 
the  objection  by  explaining  the  passage.  Such  mode  of 
dealing  with  adversaries  characterizes  the  writings  of  many 
of  the  Fathers.  In  the  treatise,  De  Virtutibus  et  Vitiis, 
Alcum  speaks  as  a  calm  exponent  of  the  Church's  doctrine, 
and  draws  his  materials  from  the  commonly  received  deposit 
of  Holy    Scripture  of  that  time. 

In  face  of  all  this,  it  is  nauseating  to  find  the  protestant 
writer  Home  placing  Alcuin  among  those  who  testify  that  the 
apocryphal  {deutero canonical)  hooks  form  no  part  of  the  Canon 
of  divinely  inspired  Scripture,^ 

The  Codex  Toletanus,  of  Toledo  in  Spain,  which, 
according  to  critics,  dates  back  to  the  eight  century,  con- 
tains all  the  deuterocanonical  books  except  Baruch. 

The  Codex  Cavensis,  of  the  Abbey  of  La  Cava  near 
Salerno,  contains  all  the  deuterocanonical  books.  This 
manuscript  is  probably  of  Spanish  origin,  of  the  end  of  the 
eighth  or  beginning  of  ninth  century.  It  contains  the  text 
of  Jerome. 

Theodulf,  Bishop  of  Orleans,  contemporary  with  Alcuin, 
made  a  recension  of  the  books  of  Scripture,  of  which  two 
copies  are  in  the  National  Museum  at  Paris,  and  another  is 
preserved  in  the  Cathedral  at  Puy.  In  the  Bible  of  Theo- 
dulf all  the  deuterocanonical  books  find  place. 

Venerable  Bede  wrote  an  allegorical  exposition  of  the 
book  of  Tobias,  and  in  his  use  of  Scripture  makes  no  dis- 
tinction between  protocanonical  and  deuterocanonical 
books,  t 

♦Home's  Introduction  to  the  Study  of  Scripture,  Vol.  I.  Appendix  I 
484. 


fBede  was  bom  at  Jarrow,  on  the  confines  of  Northumberland  and 
Scotland  in  673.  His  parents  were  Anglo-Saxons  who  had  embraced  the 
Catholic  religion.  At  the  age  of  seven  years,  they  confided  the  child  Bede, 
which  means  in  their  tongue  frayer,  to  the  Abbot  Benoit  Biscop,  who  was 
a  second  father  to  the  child.     After  three  years  passed  with  Benoit,  Bede 


486  THE    CANON   OF   THE   VIII.  AND   IX.    CENTURIES 

Against  the  authority  of  Bede  two  objections  are  raised. 
In  his  treatise,  De  Temporum  Ratione,  he  writes  as  fol- 
lows: 'Thus  far  divine  Scripture  contains  the  series  of 
events.  The  subsequent  history  of  the  Jews  is  exhibited  in 
the  book  of  Maccabees,  and  in  the  writings  of  Josephus  and 
Africanus,  who  continue  the  subsequent  history  down  to  the 
time  of  the  Romans."* 

According  to  our  adversaries,  Bede  here  draws  a  sharp 
distinction  between  divine  Scripture  and  the  mere  profane 
history  of  the  books  of  Maccabees.  In  dealing  with  this 
objection,  we  place  first  of  all  that  it  leaves  the  canonicity 
of  all  the  deuterocanonical  books,  except  the  Maccabees, 
intact.  This  is  self  evident  since  he  is  speaking  of  historical 
books  alone.  In  the  second  place,  w^e  must  interpret  the 
obscure  passages  of  a  writer  according  to  his  certain  posi- 
tion, revealed  in  his  other  works.  Now  Bede  has  quoted  all 
the  deuterocanonical  books  in  the  solemn  formulas,  cus- 
tomary in  introducing  divine  Scripture.  Did  he  therefore 
reject  Maccabees,  he  would  disagree  with  himself,  and  be 
absurdly  inconsistent.  We  believe,  therefore,  that  in  dis- 
tinguishing Maccabees  from  the  other  historical  books  of 
divine  Scripture,  he  merely  wishes  to  point  out  that  it  does 
not  alone  continue  the  series  of  historical  events  from  Ezra 
to  the  era  of  the  Romans.  Up  to  the  time  of  Ezra,  indeed, 
not  all  historical  events  were  written,  but  enough  was  writ- 
ten to  form  a  continuous  chain  of  chief  events,  and  no  other 
writings  contain  the  events  of  those  times  except  the  Holy 

was  placed  with  the  famous  Ceolfrid,  who  taught  him  the  elements  of 
sacred  and  profane  literature.  As  disciple  of  Ceolfrid,  Bede  acquired  all 
the  science  of  his  times.  At  the  age  of  nineteen,  he  became  deacon  and  at  the 
age  of  thirty,  priest.  He  began  to  write  at  the  age  of  thirty,  and  has  left 
extended  commentaries  on  nearly  all  the  books  of  Holy  Scripture.  Except- 
ing Augustine  and  Jerorae,  no  Father  has  wrought  such  a  vast  exegetical 
work.  Boniface,  the  Apostle  of  Germany,  was  wont  to  term  Bede  the 
wisest  of  the  exegetes  of  Holy  Scripture.  Full  oft,  however,  he  drifts 
away  from  the  literal  sense  into  an  excessive  mysticism.  The  whole  life 
of  Bede  was  passed  in  the  cloister.  He  died  in  735.  Bede  and  Isidore  of 
Seville  were  the  chief  sources  of  Christian  education  during  the  Middle 
Ages. 


*P.  L.  Migne  90,  539. 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   VIII.  AND   IX.  CENTURIES  487 

Books,  which  follow  each  other  in  a  certain  historical  series. 
But  after  Ezra  a  great  lacuna  occurs  in  the  history  of  the 
Jews  down  to  the  time  of  the  Romans,  which  is  only  partly 
bridged  over  by  the  combined  data  of  Maccabees,  Africanus, 
and  Josephus.  The  second  book  of  Maccabees  covers  a 
period  of  only  about  sixteen  years ;  the  first,  of  about  forty.  * 
They  are  partly  synchronous,  and  combined  would  not  cover 
a  period  of  over  fifty  years.  Hence  Bede  could  not  say  that 
divine  Scripture  contained  the  series  of  events  down  to  the 
Roman  epoch.  He,  therefore,  drew  a  distinction  between 
Maccabees  and  the  preceding  historical  books,  not  from  the 
nature  of  the  books,  but  from  the  fact  that  the  Scriptural 
history  of  the  Jews  became  broken  at  Ezra,  and  the  frag- 
ment of  it  which  existed  in  Maccabees  had  to  be  supplemen- 
ted by  the  two  cited  authors. 

The  second  objection  is  taken  from  Bede's  commentary 
on  the  Apocalypse,  Chapter  IV.  Therein  he  states:  'The 
six  wings  of  the  four  animals,  which  are  twenty-four,  signify 
so  many  books  of  the  Old  Testament,  in  which  the  authority 
of  the  evangelists  is  confirmed,  and  their  truth  is  corrobo- 
rated."* 

It  is  pitiably  absurd  to  make  Bede,  who  throughout  his 
vast  works  has  quoted  the  deuterocanonical  books  side  by 
side,  and  in  equal  place  with  the  protocanonical  Scriptures, 
reject  them  on  the  warrant  of  this  one  passage.  It  is  Bede's 
evident  opinion  here  to  consider  the  protocanonical  books  as 
a  class  by  themselves,  without  detracting  from  the  divinity 
of  the  deuterocanonical  works.  The  classing  of  the  pro- 
tocanonical works  in  a  distinct  class,  was  warranted  by 
patristic  literature,  and  this  diligent  student  of  patrology 
drew  therefrom  a  mystic  argument,  without  throwing  doubt 
on  the  deuterocanonical  books,  which  formed  a  class  by 
themselves.  The  last  factor  in  removing  this  class  distinc- 
tion, and  making  the  two  classes  perfectly  equal,  was  the 
decree  of  the  Council  of  Trent. 

In  our  review  of  these  centuries,  we  can  not  notice  every 
writer  who  has  written,  relating  to  the  books  of  Holy  Scrip- 

*P.  L.  Migne  93,  144. 


488  THE  CANON  OF  THE  IX.  CENTURY 

ture.  We  shall  content  ourselves  with  adducing  represent- 
ative men  as  the  exponents  of  the  Church's  belief  through 
these  ages. 

Rhabanus  Maurus  follows  on  the  question  of  the  Canon 
St.  Isidore  of  Seville.*  As  Rhabanus  was  a  faithful  follower 
of  the  Fathers  of  the  Church,  his  Canon  may  be  called  the 
Canon  of  tradition  of  this  century.  In  his  work,  De  Institu- 
tione  Clericorum,  Chap.  LIII.  he  formulates  the  following 
Canon:  "These  are,  therefore,  the  books  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment; in  love  of  doctrine  and  piety  the  chief  men  of  the 
Churches  have  handed  down  that  these  should  be  read  and 
received.  The  first  are  of  the  Law,  that  is,  the  five  books  of 
Moses,  viz..  Genesis,  Exodus,  Leviticus,  Numbers  and  Deu- 
teronomy. There  follow  these  fifteen  historical  books,  viz., 
Josue,  and  the  books  of  Judges,  or  Ruth  (as  one  of  them  is 
called),  the  four  books  of  Kings,  two  of  Paralipomenon, 
Tobias,  Esther  and  Judith,  two  of  Ezra  and  Two  of  Macca- 
bees. With  these  are  sixteen  prophetic  books.  There  fol- 
low eight  books  in  verse,  which  are  written  in  different  kinds 
of  metre  with  the  Hebrews,  that  is  the  book  of  Job,  the  book 
of  Psalms,  and  Proverbs,  Ecclesiastes,  the  Canticle  of  Can- 
ticles, Wisdom,  Ecclesiasticus,  and  the  Lamentations  of 
Jeremiah."  After  giving  the  complete  Canon  of  the  New 
Testament,  he  continues:  ''These  are  the  seventy-two 
canonical  books  and  on  this  account  Moses  elected  seventy 
elders  as  prophets;  and  Jesus,  Our  Lord,  sent  seventy-two 
disciples  to  preach."  The  testimony  of  Rhabanus  is  identi- 
cal with  that  of  Isidore  of  Seville,  and  is  valuable  inasmuch 
as  it  evidences  that  the  teachers  of  the  Church  found  in  St. 
Isidore  a  concise  statement  of  the  Church's  belief.   Rhabanus 

*Rhabanus  Maurus  was  born  at  Fulda  in  788  of  one  of  the  first  noble 
families  of  the  country.  At  the  age  of  six  years,  he  was  offered  by  his 
parents  to  the  monastery  of  Fulda,  wherein  his  childhood  was  passed.  He 
was  sent  later  on  to  Tours,  and  studied  under  Alcuin.  On  his  return  to 
Fulda,  he  was  elected  abbot,  and  distinguished  himself  by  reconciling 
Louis  the  debonnaire,  with  his  sons.  He  was  elected  Archbishop  of  May- 
ence  in  847,  and,  as  such,  was  distinguished  for  learning  and  zeal  in  guard- 
ing the  faith.  He  died  in  856  at  the  age  of  sixty-eight  years.  His  works, 
printed  at  Cologne  in  1627,  form  six  tomes  in  folio,  bound  in  three  volumes 
His  works  on  Scripture  are  mostly  extracts  from  the  Fathers,  which  was 
the  mode  of  the  study  of  theology  of  that  time. 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  IX.  CENTURY  489 

wrote  commentaries  on  Wisdom,  Ecclesiasticus,  Judith  and 
the  two  books  of  Maccabees. 

Walafrid  Strabo,  must  also  be  added  to  the  advocates 
of  the  Catholic  Canon.* 

In  his  Glossa  Ordinaria,  he  has  adopted  the  commenta- 
ries of  his  master  Rhabanus  Maurus,  on  Wisdom,  Ecclesias- 
ticus, Judith,  and  the  Maccabees ;  he  has  adopted  Bede's  com- 
mentary on  Tobias,  and  reproduces  the  text  of  Baruch  with- 
out commentary  with  this  preface:  'The  book  which  is 
called  Baruch  is  not  found  in  the  Hebrew  Canon,  bi«it  only  in 
the  Vulgate  edition,  as  also  the  Epistle  of  Jeremiah.  For 
the  knowledge  of  the  readers,  they  are  written  here,  for  they 
contain  many  things  relating  to  Christ,  and  the  last  times." 

The  influence  of  St.  Jerome  was  strong  in  Walafrid.  He 
has  inserted  in  his  Glossa  the  prefaces  of  St.  Jerome  concern- 
ing the  deuterocanonical  books.  That  these  prefaces  find 
place  in  his  work,  would  not  prove  that  he  adopted  Jerome's 
views,  for  the  prefaces  are  printed  in  the  Clementine  edition 
of  our  ow^n  day.  In  the  obscurity  of  the  age  when  Walafrid 
lived,  men,  with  reverence,  accepted  the  writings  of  the 
great  saints,  suspending  judgment  when  they  were  in  con- 
tradiction with  other  approved  data.  He  testifies  that 
Baruch  is  in  the  Vulgate  of  his  time,  and  that  it  contains 
much  that  is  good.  It  is  equivalent  to  say:  'The  Church 
receives  this  book,  but  I  know  not  what  degree  of  divinity 
she  accords  it." 

With  full  right,  therefore,  Pope  Nicolas  I.,  writing  to  the 
bishops  of  Gaul  in  865,  speaks  of  the  catalogue  of  Scripture 
of  Innocent  I.  as  the  law  of  the  universal  Church :  * ' — if  the 
Old  and  New  Testaments  are  to  be  received,  not  because 
they  are  to  be  found  in  a  code  of  Canons,  but  because  there 
exists  a  sentence  of  Holy  Pope  Innocent ^  concerning  their  recep- 
tion, it  follows  that  the  decretal  letters  of  Roman  Pontiffs  are 

*Walafrid,  sumamed  Strabo,  the  squint-eyed,  was  the  disciple  of  Rha- 
banus Maurus.  He  was  bom  in  806,  and  was  reared  in  the  monastery  of 
Fulda  under  Rhabanus.  He  joined  the  Benedictine  order,  became  Dean 
of  St.  Gall,  and  afterwards  Abbot  of  Reichenou  in  the  diocese  of  Constance. 
He  was  a  man  renowed  for  piety  and  profound  learning.  He  died  in  849. 
His  chief  works  are  De  Officiis,  and  Glossa  Ordinaria  in  Sacram  Scripturam. 


490  THE  CANON  OF  THE  X.  CENTURY 

to  be  received,  even  though  not  embodied  in  the  code  of 
Canons."  We  have  before  seen  that  the  decree  of  Innocent 
I.  is  identical  with  the  catalogue  of  the  Council  of  Trent. 
Nicolas  here  places  as  a  truth  conceded  by  all  that  the 
decree  of  Innocent  was  the  law  of  the  Church  on  Scripture, 

In  the  tenth  century,  doubts  again  arose  in  the  Western 
Church,  founded  solely  on  the  authority  of  St.  Jerome.  On 
one  side  stood  the  use  of  the  Church  and  the  testimony  of 
tradition ;  on  the  other,  the  declarations  of  Jerome,  the  * 'doc- 
tor of  doctors."  Hence  doubt  arose  and  uncertainty  in 
many  minds,  and  many  were  the  attempts  to  reconcile 
Jerome  with  the  belief  and  usage  of  the  Church.  These 
doubts  endured  down  to  the  time  of  the  Council  of  Trent. 

It  would  be  impossible  to  pass  in  review  over  all  the  writ- 
ings of  these  ages.  We  can  only  signalize  some  representa- 
tive men  of  both  sides.  We  find  that  the  great  body  of  the 
Church's  teachers  preserved  the  old  belief  and  tradition,  and 
the  few  who,  through  an  excessive  adhesion  to  St.  Jerome, 
broke  away  from  the  common  belief  suffice  not  to  break  the 
consensus  of  tradition.  We  find  that  most  of  those  who  fol- 
low the  opinion  of  Jerome  try  to  reconcile  him  with  the 
Church,  by  according  to  the  deuterocanonical  books  a  place 
among  the  Holy  Books,  just  short  of  certain  canonicity.  By 
this,  they  strove  to  harmonize  the  universal  usage  of  the 
Church  with  Jerome's  rejection  of  these  books  from  the 
Canon. 

NoTKER  Balbulus  opcns  the  tenth  century  with  an 
unfavorable  testimony.*  In  his  work,  De  Interpretibus 
Divinae  Scriptur^e,  Chap.  III.,  he  has  the  following  obscure 
statement:  "Of  the  book  which  is  called  the  Wisdom  of 
Solomon,  I  have  found  no  author's  exposition,  except  some 
testimonies  (therefrom)  explained  in  relation  to  other  books. 
The  book  is  totally  rejected  by  the  Hebrews,  and  is  by  Chris- 
tians considered  uncertain,  nevertheless,  since  on  account  of 

♦Notker,  sumamed  the  Stammerer,  from  his  defective  speech,  was  a 
monk  of  St.  Gall  who  died  in  912.  His  life  was  passed  in  the  retirement 
of  the  cloister,  and  little  of  it  is  known  to  us.  His  chief  works  preserved 
to  us  are:  De  Interpretibus  Divinag  Scripturae,  Liber  Sententiarum,  and  a 
Martyrology. 


THE    CANON   OF   THE    X.,  XL,  AND    XII.  CENTURIES       491 

the  utility  of  its  doctrine,  our  forefathers  were  accustomed  to 
read  it,  and  the  Jews  have  it  not,  it  is  called  with  us  Ecclesi- 
asticus.  What  thou  belie  vest  of  this,  it  behooveth  thee  to 
beHeve  also  of  the  book  of  Jesus  the  son  of  Sirach,  except  that 
this  latter  is  possessed  and  read  by  the  Hebrews.  .  .  .  The 
priest  Bede  wrote  some  things  on  Tobias  and  Ezra,  more 
pleasing  than  necessary,  since  he  has  striven  to  convert 
simple  history  into  an  allegory.  What  shall  I  say. of  the 
books  of  Judith,  Esther  and  Paralipomenon ?  By  whom,  or 
how  shall  they  be  explained,  since  their  contents  are  not 
intended  for  authority,  but  only  as  a  memorial  of  wonderful 
things?  This  thou  mayest  also  suspect  of  the  Books  of 
Maccabees."     (Patrol.  L.  Migne,  131,  996.) 

There  is  no  precedent  in  the  writings  of  Jerome,  or  of  any 
one  else  for  the  opinion  of  this  monk.  It  is  the  sole  testi- 
mony of  one  man  against  the  Church.  Any  testimony  that 
places  Paralipomenon  among  the  deuterocanonical  books 
may  well  be  set  aside  without  further  argument.  It  is 
simply  the  case  of  a  man,  admirable  in  other  things,  who 
erred  on  this  subject. 

In  the  collections  of  the  decrees  of  Councils  and  Popes, 
collected  in  the  tenth,  eleventh,  and  twelfth  centuries,  the 
Canon  of  Innocent  I.  or  of  Gelasius  always  finds  place.  The 
collection  of  Canons  of  the  Church  of  Spain,  published  by 
Gonzalez  from  a  Codex  of  976  contains  the  decree  of  Pope 
Innocent.  Burchard  of  Worms  (tio2  5),  Ives  of  Char- 
TRES  (fill 7),  and  Gratianus  (tii55)  have  received  the 
decree  of  Gelasius.  These  collections  formed  the  basis  of  the 
discipline  of  the  Church,  and  show  us  plainly  the  place  given 
to  the  deuterocanonical  books  to  have  been,  in  fact,  not 
inferior  to  that  accorded  them  in  the  Church  to-day. 

At  the  beginning  of  the  twelfth  century,  St.  Stephen 
Harding,  Abbot  of  Citeaux,  made  a  recension  of  the  Latin 
Vulgate.  In  this  recension  of  the  year  1109  we  find  all  the 
books  of  the  Catholic  Canon. 

GiSLEBERT,  Abbot  of  Westminister  (tiii7),  in  his  ''Dis- 
pute of  A  Jew  with  A  Christian,"  defends  the  authority  of 
Baruch:  * 'Although  that  which  the  book  contains  is  not 
found  in  the  book  which  bears  the  name  of  Jeremiah,  never- 


492  THE  CANON  OF  THE  XII.  CENTURY 

theless,  Jeremiah  has  produced  the  data ;  for  he  who  wrote 
this  book  wrote  not  otherwise  than  under  the  dictation  of 
Jeremiah."  (P.  L.  Migne,  159,  102 6- 1027.)  Although  there 
is  here  an  error  of  fact,  nevertheless,  the  abbot  is  true  in  his 
defense  of  the  authority  of  the  book,  which  Catholic  belief 
of  his  day  adopted. 

An  Anonymous  Writer  of  the  middle  of  the  twelfth 
century,  writing  upon  the  reading  of  the  Bible,  expresses 
himself  thus:  ''Besides  the  aforesaid  (the  protocanonical 
books),  there  are  five  books  which  are  called  by  the  Hebrews 
apocryphal,  that  is  to  say  hidden  and  doubtful,  but  the  Church 
honors  these  and  receives  them.  The  first  is  Wisdom;  the 
second,  Ecclesiasticus ;  the  third,  Tobias ;  the  fourth,  Judith ; 
the  fifth,  Maccabees."     (P.  L.  Migne,  213,  714.) 

This  is  the  exact  Catholic  position,  which  endured  and 
lived  down  every  opposing  agency. 

Aegidius,  deacon  of  Paris  (fiiSo?)  sets  forth  the  Catho- 
lic position  on  the  Canon  in  the  following  Latin  verses : 

Qui  tamen  excipit  hos;  Tobi,  Judith,  et  Machabaeus, 
Et  Baruch,  atque  Jesum,  pseudographumque  librum. 

Sed  licet  excepti,  tamen  hos  authenticat  usus 
Ecclesise,  fidei  regula,  scripta  Patrum. 

Scito  quod  ista  Dei  digito  digesta  fuerunt. 
Altus  hie  est  puteus,  grandis  abyssus  inest. 

Patrol.  Lat.  Migne,  212,  43,. 

Peter  of  Riga,  the  friend  of  Aegidius,  endorses  the 
Catholic  Canon  in  the  following  verses : 

"Lex  antiqua  tenet  cum  quater  octo  decem,  . 

Isti  terdeni  libri  sunt  et  duodeni 
Antiquse  legis,  si  numerando  legis. 

Quinque  Moys ;  Josue ;  Judex ;  Paralipomenon ;  Job' 
Bis  bini  Regum ;  Ruth ;  David ;  et  Salomon ; 

Ezechiel ;  Daniel ;  Isaias ;  Jeremias ; 
Esdras ;  Philo ;  Sirach ;  plena  vigore  Judith ; 

Hester  amoena  genis ;  Tobias ;  et  Macchabaei ; 
Scripta  prophetarum  sunt  duodena  simul ; 

Nempe  Neemias  dedit  hospitium  liber  Esdrse ; 
Et  Ruth  judicibus  hospita  facta  subest ; 

Scriptorisque  sui  Baruch  librum  Jeremias 
Post  libri  recipit  posteriora  sui." — P.  L.  Migne,  212,  23.. 

In  this  testimony,  Peter  adopted  the  erroneous  opinion  of 
some  that  Wisdom  was  written  by  Philo,  the  Jew ;  but  the 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  XII.  CENTURY  493 

value  of  his  opinion  is  not  impaired  by  this  error  since,  in 
such  opinion,  he  is  not  a  witness  of  the  Church's  behef . 

Peter  of  Blois  (ti2oo)  adopts  the  following  testimony 
verbatim  from  St.  Isidore  of  Seville:  "There  is  a  fourth 
order  with  us  of  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament,  of  the  books 
that  are  not  in  the  Hebrew  Canon,  the  first  of  these  is  Wis- 
dom ;  the  second,  Ecclesiasticus ;  the  third,  Tobias ;  the  fourth 
Judith;  the  fifth  and  sixth,  Maccabees.  These  books,  the 
Jews  place  apart  among  the  apocrypha ;  but  the  Church  of 
Christ  honors  them  among  the  divine  books  and  promulgates 
them."  (P.  L.  Migne,  207,  1052.)  This  may  be  called  the 
common  opinion  of  the  time.  It  is  always  enunciated  with 
the  certainty  and  boldness  of  men  conscious  that  they  have 
no  adversary  among  the  teachers  of  the  Church.  It  is  never 
challenged,  never  denied :  those  who  depart  from  it,  at  most, 
only  try  to  pare  away  a  little  of  the  equality  of  the  books  of 
the  second  Canon,  to  be  in  line  with  Jerome. 

HoNORius,  the  celebrated  theologian  of  Autun  (tii2o?) 
in  his  Gemma  Animae,  Chap,  cxviii,  establishes  the  mode  in 
which  the  Holy  Books  are  to  be  read  in  the  divine  office,  in 
which  testimony,  he  has  the  following:  "These  books  are 
authentic,  and  these  are  to  be  read  in  the  divine  offices.  .  .  . 
From  the  Kalends  of  August  up  to  September,  let  there  be 
read  the  Parables  of  Solomon,  Ecclesiastes,  The  Canticle  of 
Canticles,  and  The  Book  of  Wisdom,  all  of  which  Solomon 
wrote,  and  Ecclesiasticus,  which  Jesus  the  Son  of  Sirach  com- 
posed. From  the  Kalends  of  September,  for  two  weeks, 
let  there  be  read  the  book  of  Job,  which  he  composed ;  then 
for  a  week  the  book  of  Tobias,  which  he  wrote.  Then  for  a 
week,  let  there  be  read  the  book  of  Judith,  which  she  or 
Achior  wrote.  .  .  .  From  the  Kalends  of  October  to  the 
Kalends  of  November,  let  there  be  read  the  books  of  Macca- 
bees ;  the  first  of  which,  Simon  the  pontifex  wrote,  and  its  last 
part  John  his  son  is  said  to  have  written;  but  the  second 
book,  Philo,  the  Jew,  taught  by  the  Greeks,  is  known  to  have 
written."     (P.  L.  Migne,  172,  736,  737.) 

In  these  testimonies  Baruch  is  not  explicitly  mentioned, 
because  it  was  always  considered  a  part  of  Jeremiah.  It  is 
evident  that  this  theologian  is  not  advancing  an  individual 


494  THE  CANON  OF  THE  XII.  CENTURY 

Opinion  here,  but  practically  ordering  the  reading  of  books 
which  the  Church  read  as  Holy  Scripture.  His  opinion  of  the 
authorship  of  the  second  book  of  Maccabees  is  worthless, 
since  there  he  is  not  a  witness,  but  a  critic,  and  a  very  poor 
one  in  this  case. 

John  Beleth,  the  theologian  of  Paris  (1180),  in  his 
Rationale  Divinorum  Officiorum,  establishes  the  same  order 
of  reading  of  the  Scriptures.* 

Peter  Comestor  (f  1178)  has  a  testimony  favorable  to 
us.f  In  the  history  of  the  book  of  Joshua,  Praef .,  he  has  the 
following:  ''Job,  David,  three  books  of  Solomon,  Daniel, 
Paralipomenon,  Ezra,  Esther,  Sapientia,  Ecclesiasticus,  Jud- 
ith, Tobias,  Maccabees  are  called  the  Hagiographa  (al.  Apo- 
crypha), because  their  author  is  unknown;  but  since  there  is 
no  doubt  of  their  truth,  they  are  received  by  the  Church." 
(P.  L.  Migne,  198,  1260.)  Great  confusion  exists  in  this  age 
in  the  use  of  Hagiographa  and  Apocrypha.  Many  con- 
founded these  terms,  as  this  author  did  here,  if  the  text  of 
Migne  is  right.  They  seem  to  have  wished  to  reconcile 
Jerome  with  the  Church  by  attributing  to  the  word  apocry- 
phal, the  sense  of  a  book,  whose  message  was  received  by  the 
Church,  but  whose  author  was  unknown. 

A  peculiar  testimony  is  found  in  that  part  of  Peter's  his- 
tory which  treats  of  the  history  of  the  Book  of  Daniel.  In 
the  XIII.  Chapter  he  states:  "There  follows  the  history  of 
Susanna,  which  the  Hebrew  (text)  does  not  contain  in  the 

*Novein  quae  deinceps  sequuntur,  reputantur  hagiographa,  ita  tamen 
ut  sint  authentica,  nimirum  liber  Psalm orum,  liber  Jobi,  tres  libri  Salo- 
monis,  scilicet  Parabolae,  sive  mavis  dicere  Proverbia,  Ecclesiastes  et  Canti- 
cum  Canticorum,  liber  Paralipomenon,  Judith  et  Esther.  Quatuor  tan- 
dem enumerant  apocrypha,  librum  videlicet  Tobias,  Machabaeorum,  Phil- 
onis,  cujus  principium  est :  Diligite  justitiam,  et  Jesu  filii  Sirach,  qui  sic 
incipit:  Omnis  sapientia  a  Domino,  etc.,  appellaturque  etiam 
Ecclesiasticus.  Verum  hos  quatuor  quidam  non  recipiunt,  Ecclesia  tamen 
eos  approbat,  quod  argumentum  fere  habeant  librorum  Salomonis,  etiamsi 
eorum  auctores  pro  certo  ac  vere  non  sciat.      (P.  L.  Migne,  202,66.) 


tPeter,  sumamed  Comestor,  low  latin  for  an  eater,  a  gourmand,  was  of 
Troyes  in  France.  He  was  called  Comestor,  the  eater,  to  signify  that  he 
had  devoured  all  the  erudition  of  his  time,  or  from  the  fact  of  his  prodigious 
memory  of  Scripture.  His  best  work  is  his  Scholastic  History,  from  which 
he  merited  to  be  called  the  Master  of  Historv. 


THE    CANON    OF   THE   XII.  CENTURY  495 

Book  of  Daniel.  It  calls  it  a  fable,  not  that  it  denies  the 
history,  but  because  it  is  falsely  stated  there,  that  the  priests 
were  stoned,  whom  Jeremiah  testifies  to  have  been  burned ; 
and  because  we  fable  it  to  have  been  written  by  Daniel, 
whereas  it  was  written  by  a  certain  Greek."  The  loose  ideas 
of  inspiration  then  prevailing,  made  it  possible  for  this 
uncritical  mind  to  believe  that  historical  falsehood  could 
exist  in  Scripture. 

A  testimony  unfavorable  to  the  Book  of  Wisdom  is 
found  in  the  writings  of  Rupert,  Abbot  of  Deutz.*  In  his 
Commentary  on  Genesis,  Chap.  XXXI.,  he  denies  the  can- 
onicity  of  Wisdom :  '  'Concerning  whom  (Adam) ,  whether  he 
ever  obtained  through  Christ  mercy,  by  which  we  are  saved 
and  freed,  certain  ones  in  these  days  discuss,  for  the  reason 
that  nowhere  does  the  canonical  Scripture  testify  that  he  did 
penance.  Only  in  the  book,  which  bears  the  title  of  Wisdom, 
it  is  thus  written  concerning  him:  'She  (Wisdom)  pre- 
served him,  that  was  the  first  formed  by  God,  the  father  of 
the  world,  when  he  was  created  alone,  and  she  brought  him 
out  of  his  sin,  and  gave  him  power  to  govern  all  things. 
(Sap.  X.  1-2).  But  this  Scripture  is  not  of  the  canon,  nor  is 
that  sentence  taken  from  canonical  Scripture.  .  .  .  What, 
therefore,  is  therein  said:  'She  brought  him  out  of  his  sin, 
and  gave  him  power  to  govern  all  things,'  is  more  readily 
rejected  than  received."     (P.  L.  Migne,  167,  318.) 

In  his  Commentary  on  Jeremiah,  Rupert  mentions  not 
Baruch  (Ibid.) ;  and  he  omits  all  the  deuterocanonical  frag- 
ments from  Daniel,  (Ibid.).  In  his  work  De  Divinis Officiis, 
he  renders  clear  testimony  that  all  the  deuterocanonical 
books  were  read  side  by  side  with  the  books  of  the  first  Canon 
as  divine  Scripture,  and  then  throws  a  doubt  on  Tobias  and 
Judith:  "These  two  volumes  are  not  in  the  canon  with  the 
Hebrews,  but,  on  the  authority  of  the  Nicene  Synod,  they 

*Rupert  of  Deutz  was  bom  in  the  territory  of  Ipres.  He  entered  the 
Benedictine  Order  in  the  Abbey  of  St.  Lawrence  near  Liege.  He  passed 
thence  to  the  Abbey  of  St  Lawrence  of  Oosbourg,  near  Utrecht.  His  great 
piety  and  deep  knowledge  of  the  Scriptures  moved  Frederic,  Archbishop 
of  Cologne,  to  make  him  Abbot  of  Deutz  near  Cologne,  where  he  died  in 
1135.  He  has  left  numerous  works,  principal  of  which  is  his  Commentary 
on  Holy  Scripture. 


496  THE  CANON  OF  THE  XII.  CENTURY 

are  adopted  for  the  instruction    of  the  Church."     (P.    L. 
Migne,  170,  332.) 

In  his  work,  De  Victoria  Verbi  Dei,  speaking  of  the 
causes  of  Aman's  wrath,  as  set  forth  in  the  deuterocanonical 
Twelfth  Chapter  of  Esther,  he  contrasts  the  data  with  the 
protocanonical  Third  Chapter  of  the  same  book,  saying: 
"But  a  greater  and  more  certain  cause  of  this  hate  and  great 
wrath  is  that  which  the  truth  of  Scripture  asserts  thus: 
'Mardochai  alone  did  not  bend  the  knee  and  adore  Aman.'  " 
(P.  L.  Migne,  169,  1384.) 

It  is  evident,  therefore,  that  the  deuterocanonical  data 
are  not  ranked  as  the  truth  of  Scripture.  In  the  same  work, 
from  the  Seventh  to  the  Twenty-sixth  Chapter,  Rupert  dis- 
courses on  the  books  of  Maccabees,  which  he  clearly  recog- 
nizes as  divine  Scripture.     (P.  L.  Migne,  169,  142 8- 144 2.) 

We  find  in  Rupert  a  man  strongly  imbued  with  the  opin- 
ions of  Jerome,  of  whose  writings  he  had  been  an  assiduous 
reader.  Jerome  was  the  classical  authority  of  those  days  on 
Scripture,  and  it  is  not  strange  that  Rupert,  his  disciple, 
should  have  adopted  some  of  his  opinions.  Like  his  master, 
he  is  not  consistent,  and  in  his  practical  use  of  Scripture 
regularly  quotes  the  deuterocanonical  books  as  divine  Scrip- 
ture. He  breaks  away  from  the  common  voice  of  tradition, 
when  he  denies  the  divinity  of  the  same.  It  was  only  the 
safeguarding  power  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  acting  through  the 
Church,  that  saved  these  books  against  the  authority  of 
Jerome,  who  was  the  great  authority  on  Scripture  in  the 
middle  age.  This  protection  of  God  permitted  an  occasional 
word  against  the  divinity  of  the  aforesaid  books. 

Hugh  of  St.  Victor  also  adopts  the  opinions  of  the  Pro- 
logus  Galeatus.*  In  his  prefatory  remarks,  De  Scripturis  et 
Scriptoribus  Sacris,  after  giving  the  list  of  the  protocanonical 
books,  he  continues:  "All,  therefore,  make  twenty-two. 
There  are  besides  certain  other  books,  as  the  Wisdom  of  Solo- 
mon, the  Book  of  Jesus  the  Son  of  Sirach,  The  Book  of  Judith, 

*Hugh  of  St.  Victor  was  Canon  regular  of  St,  Victor  at  Paris.  His 
origin  is  controverted.  So  great  was  his  fame  in  theology  in  Paris  that 
men  called  him  the  second  Augustine,  He  died  in  1 140  at  the  age  of  forty- 
four  years. 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  XII.  CENTURY  497 

Tobias,  and  the  Maccabees,  which  are  read,  but  are  not  written 
in  the  Canons 

After  enumerating  the  books  of  the  New  Testament,  the 
decretals  of  Popes,  and  the  writings  of  the  Fathers,  among 
whom  the  first  in  place  is  Jerome,  he  continues :  ''But  these 
writings  of  the  Fathers  are  not  computed  in  the  text  of  the 
divine  Scriptures,  just  as  we  have  said  that  there  are  books 
which  are  not  embodied  in  the  Canon  of  the  Old  Testament, 
and  yet  are  read,  as  the  Wisdom  of  Solomon  and  other  books. 
The  text,  therefore,  of  Holy  Scripture,  as  one  body,  is  princi- 
pally made  up  of  thirty  books.  Of  these  twenty-two  books 
are  comprised  in  the  Old  Testament,  and  eight  in  the  New. 
(Hugh  made  one  book  of  the  thirteen  Epistles  of  Paul,  and 
another  book  of  all  the  Catholic  Epistles) .  The  other  writ- 
ings are,  as  it  were,  adjuncts,  and  deductions  from  the  fore- 
going.",   (P.  L.  Migne,  175,  15,  16.) 

In  his  Prologue,  De  Sacramentis,  he  manifests  the  same 
views:  ''There  are,  besides,  in  the  Old  Testament  certain 
other  books,  which  are  read,  indeed,  but  are  not  within  the 
Corpus  Scripturarum,  or  in  the  authentic  Canon.  These  are 
Tobias,  Judith,  Maccabees,  and  that  which  is  inscribed  the 
Wisdom  of  Solomon,  and  Ecclesiasticus." 

Hugh  is  also  a  Jeromist  of  a  pronounced  type.  All  that 
the  Church  had  done  up  to  his  time  was  to  place  these  books 
before  the  faithful  as  Scripture.  She  had  not  defined  the 
exact  degree  of  their  inspiration.  It  is  only  concerning  this 
degree  of  inspiration  that  Hugh  errs.  He  testifies  to  the 
presence  of  the  books  in  the  divine  deposit.  The  degree  of 
their  inspiration  was  yet  an  open  question;  in  judging  of  this 
degree,  he  went  with  his  great  master  Jerome,  and  excluded 
the  books  of  the  second  Canon  from  an  equality  with  the  first. 
The  authority  of  Hugh  of  St.  Victor  was  great  in  the  Church ; 
and,  doubtless,  he  contributed  much  to  keep  up  the  uncer- 
tainty which  was  finally  removed  by  the  Council  of  Trent .  It 
was  not  with  those  writers  a  question  of  the  rejection  of  the 
deuterocanonical  books — these  books  had  a  place  in  the 
deposit  of  the  sacred  literature  of  the  Church — but  it  was  a 
question  of  equality  with  the  other  books ;  and  on  this  point 
some  limited  the  authority  of  the  books  to  something  less 
than  canonicity. 

(32)  H.S. 


498  THE    CANON   OF   THE    XII.  CENTURY 

Rudolph  of  Flavigny  (fuss),  divides  the  books  of 
Scripture  into  four  classes,  historical,  prophetical,  books  of 
proverbs,  and  books  of  simple  doctrine.  He  places  Wisdom 
and  Ecclesiasticus  with  protocanonical  books  in  the  fourth 
class,  but  declares  that  * 'Tobias,  Judith  and  Maccabees, 
although  read  for  the  instruction  of  the  Church,  have  not 
perfect  authority."* 

That  the  books  should  be  read  in  the  Church,  was  the 
Church's  work,  infallible  and  uniform;  she  preserved  them 
for  her  children,  because  they  were  divine :  the  fluctuation  of 
individual  opinions  regarding  their  exact  degree  of  inspira- 
tion was  the  work  of  man.  As  long  as  the  main  point,  the 
deliverance  of  the  message  of  these  books  to  the  people,  was 
safeguarded,  the  Church  could  permit  the  conflict  of  individ- 
ual opinions'in  the  speculative  order,  till,  in  her  own  good 
time,  she  declared  authoritatively  what  character  she  had 
always  given  to  these  books. 

Peter  of  Cluny,  sumamed  the  Venerable,  is  by  some 
quoted  as  an  adversary  of  the  deuterocanonical  books. f  In 
his  letter  against  Peter  of  Bruys  and  his  sect,  called  the  Petro- 
brusiani,  after  enumerating  the  protocanonical  books,  he 
continues:  'There  remain  besides  these  authentic  books  of 
Holy  Scripture  six  other  books  which  are  not  to  be  passed 
over  in  silence,  viz.,  Wisdom,  the  Book  of  Jesus  Son  of  Sirach, 

*Radulphi  Flaviacensis  in  Levit.  XIV.  I.  (Biblioth.  Max.  Patnim 
Lugduni,  1667,  Tom,  VIT.  177  )     (The  work  is  not  in  Migne's  collection  ) 


tPeter.  the  Venerable,  entered  the  order  of  the  monks  of  Cluny  and  in 
1 121  became  general  of  the  order.  His  great  piety  and  learning  placed 
him  in  this  post  at  the  age  of  twenty-eight  years.  Abelard  found  an 
asylum  with  him,  and  was  moved  by  him  to  retract  his  errors.  Peter  was 
indefatigable  in  combating  the  errors  that  arose  in  France  at  that  time. 
He  merits  to  be  named  with  St.  Bernard  as  one  of  the  foremost  churchmen 
of  that  age.  In  defense  of  his  order,  he  opposed  St.  Bernard,  who  re- 
proached the  order  for  their  worldliness  and  sumptuousness  in  their  build- 
ings and  table.  These  vices  wrought  their  downfall,  and  they  shamelessly 
bartered  the  rights  of  the  Church  to  the  revolutionists  for  secularization. 
Peter  died  at  his  monastery  in  11 56.  There  are  preserved  of  his  writings 
six  books  of  Letters,  a  Treatise  on  The  Divinity  of  Christ,  a  Treatise 
against  the  Jews,  a  Treatise  on  Infant  Baptism  against  Peter  of  Bruys,  a 
Treatise  on  The  Authority  of  the  Church,  Treatises  on  The  Basilicas,  The 
Churches  and  The  Altars,  etc. 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  XII.  CENTURY  499 

Tobias,  Judith,  and  the  two  books  of  Maccabees.  Although 
these  do  not  reach  the  subHme  dignity  of  the  preceding, 
nevertheless,  on  account  of  their  laudable  and  very  necessary 
doctrine,  they  have  merited  to  he  received  by  the  Church.  There 
is  no  need  that  I  should  labor  in  commending  these  to  you. 
For  if  ye  value  the  Church  in  any  wise,  ye  will  receive  some- 
thing, at  least  a  little,  on  her  authority.  But  if  (as  Christ 
said  of  Moses  to  the  Jews)  ye  will  not  believe  Christ's  Church 
how  will  ye  believe  my  words  ?"     (P.  L.  Migne,  i88,  751.) 

Viewed  in  a  proper  light,  this  text  has  nothing  unfavor- 
able to  the  complete  Canon.  Peter  is  arguing  with  men  who 
boasted  that  they  received  only  the  Gospels,  and  he  asks 
them  to  receive  the  other  books  on  the  authority  of  the 
Church.  There  is  a  perfect  accord  in  all  these  exponents  of 
Catholic  thought  in  stating  that  the  Church  received  the  deu- 
terocanonical  books.  The  only  difference  of  opinion  that 
existed  regarded  the  rank  and  dignity  of  these  books.  They 
received  and  used  them ;  some  of  these  writers  hesitated  to 
pronounce  the  last  word  regarding  the  canonicity  of  these 
books,  because  the  Church  had  not  yet  defined  the  question. 
That  Peter,  the  Venerable,  in  limiting  the  dignity  of  these 
books,  did  not  deny  their  divine  inspiration,  is  evident  from 
his  copious  quotations  from  all  of  them,  as  divine  Scripture. 
Witness  a  few  examples.  In  the  aforesaid  treatise,  speaking 
of  the  Book  of  Maccabees,  he  declares :  "But  of  Judas  Mac- 
cabseus,  the  excellent  leader  of  the  Hebrews,  the  truthful 
Scripture  commemorates  that,  after  the  destruction  of  the 
pagan  army,  he  took  the  sword  of  the  general  Apollonius 
whom  he  had  slain,  and  fought  with  it  all  his  days."  I. 
Maccab.  III. 

In  the  same  treatise,  he  establishes  from  the  II.  of  Macca- 
bees, "that  it  is  a  holy  thought  to  pray  for  the  dead,  that 
they  may  be  re^leased  from  their  sins."    II.  Maccab.  XII.  46. 

In  his  Thirty-fourth  Epistle,  quoting  the  sixth  verse  of 
the  twenty-second  chapter  of  Ecclesiasticus,  he  says ;  "That 
divine  philosopher  saith :  'A  tale  out  of  time  is  like  music  in 
mourning.'  " 

In  his  treatise  against  the  Jews,  Chapter  II.,  he  proves 
the  divinity  of  Christ  from  the  authority  of  Baruch:     "And 


500  THE  CANON  OF  THE  XII.  CENTURY 

although  these  things  should  suffice  to  prove  the  divinity  of 
Christ  to  even  brute  beasts,  let  the  Prophet  or  prophetic  man 
come  forth,  Baruch  the  notary  or  colleague  of  Jeremiah. 
Let  him  come  forth,  and,  although  he  draws  his  spirit  from 
another,  nevertheless  it  is  from  the  prophetic  heart  of  Jere- 
miah, and  therefore  as  of  one  spirit  with  the  Prophet,  let  him 
state,  not  in  enigmas,  but  lucidly  and  openly,  what  he  thinks 
of  the  divinity  of  Christ.  This  man  manifestly,  after  many 
things  said  of  God,  adds:  'This  is  our  God,  and  there  shall 
be  no  other  be  accounted  of  in  comparison  of  him.  He 
found  out  all  the  way  of  knowledge,  and  gave  it  to  Jacob, 
his  servant,  and  to  Israel  his  beloved.  Afterwards,  he  was 
seen  upon  earth,  and  conversed  with  men.'  "  Baruch  III. 
36-38. 

In  the  same  treatise.  Chapter  IV.,  he  declares  thus :  **Who 
i^  it  that  in  a  certain  one  of  your  books  speaks  by  the  wise 
man:  *My  memory  is  unto  everlasting  generations'  (Eccli. 
XXI V.  2 8  ?)  Is  it  not  God  ?  Verily  it  is  Godr  The  Coun- 
cil of  Trent  asks  no  more  than  is  substantially  declared  in 
these  passages,  and  by  its  everlasting  sanction,  it  has  made 
canonical  the  books  that  Peter  considered  divine. 

John  of  Salisbury  follows  Jerome  on  the  Canon.*  In 
Epistola  CXLIII.  he  declares  thus:  "Since,  therefore,  con- 
cerning the  number  of  the  books,  I  read  mam^  and  different 
opinions  of  the  Fathers,  following  Jerome,  a  doctor  of  the 
Catholic  Church,  whom  I  hold  most  approved  in  establish- 
ing foundations  of  Scripture,  I  firml}^  believe  that,  as  there 
are  twenty-two  Hebrew  letters,  thus  there  are  twenty-two 

*John  of  Salisbury  receives  his  name  from  his  birthplace  in  England. 
The  date  ol  his  birth  is  about  1 1 10  He  was  sent  to  France  to  study,  and 
was  afterwards  sent  by  the  King  of  England  to  the  papal  court  to  manage 
the  interests  of  England  there.  Recalled  to  England,  he  was  advanced 
to  high  offices  by  the  High  Chancellor,  Thomas  a.  Becket.  John  became 
inseparably  attached  to  Becket,  and  went  with  him  when  Becket  was 
made  Archbishop  of  Canterbury.  He  tried  to  defend  him  against  the 
murderers  sent  by  Henry  II.,  and  parried  the  first  blow  aimed  at  Becket's 
head  by  receiving  it  on  his  arm.  John  was  subsequently  made  Bishop  of 
Chartres,  which  charge  he  filled  faithfully  and  well.  He  was  one  of  the 
finest  spirits  of  his  age,  a  man  of  deep  piety  and  learning  He  died  in 
1 180.  He  has  left  many  works,  principal  among  which  is  Polycrati.cus  or 
the  vanities  of  the  Court. 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  XII.  CENTURY  501 

books  of  the  Old  Testament,  arranged  in  three  orders  .  .  . 
And  these  are  found  in  the  Prologue  to  the  Book  of  Kings 
which  Jerome  called  the  Galeatum  Principium  of  all  Scrip- 
ture. .  .  .  But  the  Book  of  Wisdom,  Ecclesiasticus,  Judith, 
Tobias,  and  Pastor,  as  the  same  Father  asserts,  are  not  in  the 
Canon,  neither  is  the  book  of  Maccabees,  which  is  divided  in 
two."     (P.  L.  199;  125,  126.) 

In  the  same  work,  he  speaks  again  of  the  deuterocanoni- 
cal  books  thus:  ''Concerning  Tobias,  Judith,  and  the  Book 
of  Maccabees,  which  are  not  received  in  the  Canon,  by  whom 
they  were  written,  the  common  opinion  does  not  teach  us, 
neither  do  the  followers  of  Philo  mention  them;  but  since 
they  build  up  faith  and  religion,  they  are  piously  admitted^ 
Philo  wrote  the  Book  of  Wisdom,  and  it  is  called  Pseudo- 
graphus;  not  that  he  wrote  falsely,  but  because  he  falsely 
entitled  it ;  for  it  is  called  the  Wisdom  of  Solomon,  whereas, 
it  was  not  written  by  Solomon,  but  is  called  of  Solomon,  on 
account  of  its  style  and  excellent  moral  teaching.  Jesus  Son 
of  Sirach  wrote  Ecclesiasticus,  which  also,  from  the  similar- 
ity of  its  style  and  moral  teaching,  is  called  Solomon's." 

The  practice  of  John  of  Salisbury  is  in  direct  opposition  to 
his  theory  here  announced.  His  works  are  full  of  quota- 
tions from  the  deuterocanonical  Scriptures  as  divine  Scrip- 
ture. He  was  infected  by  a  sort  of  hero  worship  towards  St. 
Jerome,  somewhat  similar  to  that  which  in  our  day  set  in 
towards  St.  Thomas,  which  is  in  itself  neither  to  the  glory  of 
the  saint,  nor  conformable  to  the  truth.  Without  sufficient 
depth  or  critical  acumen  to  penetrate  the  question-  and  form 
a  comprehensive  judgment  of  it,  John  paid  a  blind  allegiance 
to  his  master,  and,  at  the  same  time,  made  much  use  of  these 
very  same  books  as  Scripture.  Jurare  in  verba  magistri  was 
the  motto  of  these  schoolmen,  and  often  they  extolled  the 
opinions  of  the  master  over  the  voice  of  tradition.  The 
error  of  John,  then,  is  due  to  defect  of  proper  investigation, 
and  to  an  excessive  addiction  to  the  opinions  of  St.  Jerome. 


502  THE    CANON   OF   THE    XIII.  CENTURY 

Chapter  X. 

The  Canon  of  the  Church  from  the  Beginning  of 
Thirteenth  Century  to  the  Council  of  Trent. 

Throughout  this  epoch,  the  Bible  of  the  Church  con- 
tained the  protocanonical  and  deuterocanonical  books,  with- 
otit  any  indication  of  difference  in  them.  This  truth  is  clearly 
proven  by  the  many  manuscripts  existing  of  this  period. 
Whether  the  work  of  chaptering  the  Bible  was  done  by 
Hugh  of  St.  Carus  or  by  Stephen  Langton  is  uncertain,  but 
it  extended  to  all  the  books  of  the  Catholic  Canon,  and  the 
Correctoria  of  this  period  also  embrace  the  books  of  both 
classes. 

Albertus  Magnus,  in  his  exposition  of  the  Prologue  of 
St.  Jerome  on  Baruch,  manifestly  defends  the  divinity  of  the 
book.*  Commenting  the  words  of  Jerome:  'The  Book  of 
Baruch,  the  secretary  of  Jeremiah,  which  is  not  read  by  the 
Hebrews,  nor  possessed  by  them,"  etc.,  Albert  endeavors  by 
scholastic  subtlety  to  benignly  interpret  Jerome:  "Never- 
theless, the  truth  of  the  book  is  not  thereby  called  in  ques- 
tion, because  it  is  joined  to  canonical  Scripture.  For  it 
contains  nothing  except  what  was  enunciated  by  Jeremiah, 
and  for  this  reason,  it  is  united  in  the  same  truth  with  the 
Prophet  Jeremiah.  For  the  Hebrews  compute  twenty-two 
books  in  the  Canon  of  Scripture,  in  accordance  with  the 
twenty-two  letters  of  their  alphabet ;  or  twenty-four  books, 
corresponding  to  the  twenty-four  ancients.     But  the  added 

*Albert  was  bom  at  Lauingen,  in  Swabia,  about  the  close  of  the  twelfth 
century.  He  was  descended  from'the  Counts  of  Bollstaedt.  He  studied 
at  Padua,  and  in  1223  entered  the  Dominican  Order  at  Cologne.  His  life 
was  given  to  teaching  in  the  schools  and  to  preaching.  In  1254,  he  was 
made  provincial  of  the  Dominicans  of  Germany;  and  in  1260,  Bishop  of 
Ratisbon.  He  renounced  the  bishopric  for  the  monk's  cell,  and  died  at 
Cologne  in  1280.  The  saying  of  Cicero  could  be  applied  to  Albert,  that  he 
had  left  writings  enough  to  cremate  his  body.  But  his  works  are  more 
vast  than  solid ;  they  manifest  indefatigable  toil  in  reading  and  collating 
the  works  of  others,  rather  than  profundity  of  personal  thought :  the  pom- 
pous verbiage  of  the  schoolmen,  and  excessive  mysticism  characterize  them 
throughout.  It  was  remarked  of  Albert  by  a  French  writer,  that  he  was 
called  great,  only  because  he  lived  in  an  age  when  men  were  little.  He  is 
withal  a  good  witness  of  the  tradition  of  his  times. 


THE    CANON   OF   THE    XIII.  AND    XIV.    CENTURIES  503 

books  they  reckon  in  the  same  number,  as  Baruch  is  added  to 
Jeremiah,  for  the  reason  that  he  received  from  Jeremiah 
whatever  he  wrote,  ...  .so  that  the  whole  truth  of  this  Scrip- 
ture rests  on  the  revelation  of  God  made  to  Jeremiah." 

Whatever  be  the  defects  of  this  data,  it  is  evident  that 
Albert  is  an  avowed  advocate  of  the  deuterocanonical  books. 
He  quotes  from  all  of  them  in  his  works,  assigning  them  equal 
place  with  the  books  of  the  first  Canon. 

St.  Bonaventure  comprises  all  the  protocanonical  and 
deuterocanonical  books  in  twenty-six  books. f 

He  evidences  in  many  ways  that  he  held  the  books  in 
equal  esteem.  In  the  preface  to  his  Commentary  on  Wisdom 
he  says :  "The  efficient  cause  of  the  book  is  threefold :  God 
who  inspired  it,  Solomon  who  produced  it,  and  Philo  who 
compiled  it."  His  works  evince  that  he  held  the  like  opinion 
of  the  other  deuterocanonical  books. 

Alexander  Neck  am,  professor  at  the  University  of  Paris 
at  the  commencement  of  the  thirteenth  century,  wrote  a 
commentary  on  the  difficult  passages  of  Holy  Scripture  and 
includes  the  books  of  both  classes  in  the  same  category. 

Robert  Holkot  (f  1340),  a  learned  Dominican  of  North- 
ampton in  England,  is  bold  in  favor  of  the  deuterocanonical 
books.  *'St.  Augustine,"  he  says,  ''expressly  declares  in  his 
Christian  Doctrine  (II.  8)  that  the  Book  of  Wisdom  should  be 
enumerated  in  the  Sacred  Scriptures;  for,  enumerating  the 
books  of  the  Canon  and  the  Bible,  he  says  thus  of  Wisdom 
and  Ecclesiasticus :  'AVisdom  and  Ecclesiasticus,  since  they 
have  merited  to  be  received  in  authority,  are  reckoned 
among  the  prophetic  books.'  Wherefore,  it  is  evident  that  the 
hook  {Wisdom)  is  counted  among  the  Canonical  Scriptures  in 

fThe  secular  name  of  St.  Bonaventure  was  John  Fidanza.  He  was 
born  at  Bagnorea,  in  Italy,  in  1221.  He  entered  the  Franciscan  Order  at 
the  age  of  seventeen  years.  He  studied  at  the  University  of  Paris  under 
the  celebrated  Alexander  Hales.  Bonaventure  rose  by  his  merit  to  be 
called  the  Seraphic  Doctor,  one  of  the  greatest  doctors  of  the  Church.  In 
1257,  he  was  made  general  of  his  order,  and  in  1272,  Gregory  X.  created 
him  Cardinal  and  Bishop  of  Albano.  He  was  one  of  the  first  theologians 
of  the  Council  of  Lyon,  but  he  died  after  the  first  session  in  1274.  He  has 
left  voluminous  works,  more  than  twenty  of  which  treat  of  sacred  Scrip- 
ture. His  works  are  characterized  by  a  moderation  and  wisdom,  re- 
sembling that  found  in  the  works  of  John  Chrysostom. 


504  THE    CANON    OF   THE    XIII.  AND   XIV.  CENTURIES 

the  Church,  though  the  contrary  is  held  by  the  Jews  .  .  .  and 
therefore,  although  by  the  Jews  rejected,  the  books  are  of 
great  authority  among  the  faithful."* 

Thomas  Netter,  better  known  as  Thomas  Waldensis, 
from  his  birthplace  Walden  in  England,  a  Carmelite  of  such 
learning  that  he  was  sent  by  Henry  IV.  of  England  to  the 
Councils  of  Pisa  and  Florence,  maintains  stoutly  in  his  Doc- 
trinaleFidei  that  the  canonicity  of  a  book  must  be  determined 
by  the  authority  of  the  Church.  He  appeals  against  the  fol- 
lowers of  Wicklif  to  the  Decree  of  Gelasitis,  to  establish  the 
books  that  are  to  be  held  in  full  authority. 

John  of  Ragusa  (ti45o)  a  Dominican  doctor  of  the 
Sorbonne,  who  was  president  of  the  Council  of  Basle,  announ- 
ces in  no  doubtful  terms,  in  the  aforesaid  council,  the  doc- 
trine of  the  Church :  *  'Moreover,  it  is  manifest  that  there  are 
many  books  in  the  Bible,  which  are  not  held  in  authority  with 
the  Jews,  but  are  by  them  reckoned  apocryphal,  which, 
nevertheless,  by  us  are  held  in  the  same  veneration  and 
authorit}^  as  the  others,  and  our  acceptance  of  them  rests  on 
nothing  but  the  tradition  and  acceptance  of  the  whole 
Catholic  Church,  which  it  is  not  lawful  pertinaciously  to  con- 
tradict."! The  voice  of  the  Church  speaks  through  this 
man,  which  spoke  again  through  the  Fathers  of  the  Council 
of  Trent. 

St.  Thomas  aquinas  (11274)  does  not  treat  the  question 
of  the  canonicity  of  the  deutero  canonical  books  ex  professo. 
He  is  falsely,  however,  placed  by  some  protestants  as  an 
adversary  of  these  books. 

A  just  way  to  judge  of  a  man's  opinion  of  Scripture  is  by 
his  practical  use  of  it.  In  his  Summa  Theologica  St.  Thomas 
has  quoted  Baruch  twice:  I.  Maccabees,  more  than  twelve 
times;  II.  Maccabees  more  than  fifty-two  times;  Judith, 
more  than  nineteen  times ;  Tobias,  more  than  seventy  times ; 
Wisdom,  more  than  one  hundred  and  twelve  times;  and 
Ecclesiasticus,  more  than  one  hundred  and  thirteen  times. 

*Postilla  super  Lib.  Sapientiae,  Cap.  I.  Sect.  2. 


tMansi.  Coll.  Concil.  XXIX.,  p.  88; 


THE    CANON   OF   THE   XIII.  CENTURY  505 

The  protestant  Hody  endeavors  to  shake  St.  Thomas' 
authority  in  favor  of  the  deuterocanonical  books  by  the  three 
following  testimonies.  In  his  seventh  opusculum,  Chapter 
IV.,  commenting  the  work  of  the  ps6udo  Areopagite,  De 
Divinis  Nominibus,  St.  Thomas  speaks  of  a  quotation  from 
Wisdom  thus :  ''From  which  it  is  evident  that  Wisdom  was 
not  yet  held  (nondum  habebatur)  >  among  the  canonical 
Scriptures."  That  this  testimony  is  not  unfavorable  to  our 
case  is  evident  from  a  mere  reading.  But  we  hope  to  show 
that  it  is  a  direct  testimony  in  favor  of  the  books.  If  there 
is  any  point  to  the  declaration,  in  saying  that  at  a  certain  time, 
a  book  was  not  yet,  nondum,  in  the  canonical  Scriptures,  the 
writer  supposes  that  at  his  writing  it  was  there. 

The  second  text  objected  against  us  is  from  the  Summa 
Theologica,  I.  Q.  89,  art.  8,  ad  2.  There,  commenting  on  the 
apparition  of  Samuel  to  Saul  (I.  Sam.  XXVIII.  11  et  seqq. 
et  Eccli.  XLVI.  23),  he  answers  the  objection  first  by  the 
authority  of  Ecclesiasticus,  and  then  subjoins:  ''Whence  it 
can  be  said  of  Samuel  that  he  appeared  by  divine  revelation, 
as  it  is  stated  in  Eccli.  XLVI.,  'that  he  slept  and  made  known 
to  the  King  the  end.  of  his  life.'  Or  the  apparition  was  pro- 
cured by  demons,  if  the  authority  of  Ecclesiasticus  is  not 
received,  for  the  reason  that  it  is  not  among  the  canonical  Scrip- 
tures  with  the  Jews.''  This  proposition  is  of  a  man  who  him- 
self receives  the  book  but  grants  to  his  opponent  the  right 
to  .doubt  it.  It  is  also  of  a  man  little  interested  in  the  ques- 
tion of  the  canonicity  of  Scripture. 

In  saying  that  the  book  was  not  received  by  the  Jews,  he 
does  not  establish  that  it  is  not  received  by  the  Christians ;  in 
fact,  he  seems  to  imply  that  it  was  received  by  them,  but  not 
in  such  manner  as  to  preclude  all  doubt.  The  mind  of  St. 
Thomas  was  not  much  given  to  these  critical  questions.  He 
used  the  Scriptures  as  the  Church  used  them,  and  this  is  the 
sole  passage  in  all  his  works,  where  he  allows  any  place  for 
doubt  concerning  them. 

The  third  objection  is  urged  by  Hody  that  St.  Thomas 
speaks  of  the  Fable  of  Bel  and  the  Dragon,  Dan.  XIII.  But 
all  critics  now  agree  that  this  work  is  supposititious.  The 
learning  of  that  time  consisted  chiefly  in  a  command  of 


506  THE   CANON   OF  THE   XIII.  CENTURY 

what  the  Fathers  had  written,  and  often  we  find  conflicting 
statements  made  by  the  same  writer,  due  to  the  fact  that  he 
had  drawn  from  different  sources,  without  weighing  the 
question  in  se.  So  this  unknown  writer  of  this  supposititious 
work  had  probably  read  Jerome  and  adopted  his  phrase- 
ology. 

Among  the  works  of  St.  Thomas  is  found  a  commentary 
on  the  books  of  Maccabees,  in  the  preface  of  which  it  is 
stated,  "that  these  books  have  no  authority  with  the  Jews, 
as  have  the  twenty-four  which  compose  the  Canon  according 
to  Jerome,  but  they  have  authority  in  the  Latin  Church, 
which  approved  them  in  a  certain  council,  and  ordered  them 
to  be  read."  The  authenticity  of  this  work  is  rejected  by 
many  critics,  and  the  work  is  believed  to  belong  to  an  English 
writer  named  Thomas,  and  to  date  from  about  the  close  of  the 
fourteenth  century,  but  it  still  remains  a  testimony  of  that 
time  to  the  Catholic  Canon. 

PIuGH  OF  St.  Carus  (ti26o)  follows  Jerome  on  the 
Canon.* 

After  enumerating  the  protocanonical  books  in  verse,  he 
continues  thus  in  Latin  verse : 

Restant  apocrypha:     Jesus,  Sapientia,  Pastor, 
Et  Machabasorum  libri,  Judith  atque  Tobias, 
Hi  quia  sunt  dubii,  sub  canone  non  numerantur; 
Sed  quia  vera  canunt,  Ecclesia  suscipit  illos. 

—  (Postil.   in  Jos.,   Prol.) 

That  he  does  not  reject  these  books  from  the  Scriptures, 

appears  from  his  prologues  in  Judith  and  Ecclesiasticus, 

wherein  he  says :     'The  palace  of  the  king  is  made  up  of  four 

things :  the  foundation,  the  walls,  the  roof,  and  the  interior 

ornaments.     The  foundation  is  the  Law;  the  walls  are  the 

Prophets  and  the  Epistles ;  the  roof  is  the  Gospels,  and  the 

ornaments  are  the  Hagiographa  and  the  Apocrypha." 

*Hug:h  was  called  of  St.  Carus,  because  the  place  of  his  birth  was  close 
to  the  church  of  this  name  in  the  environs  of  Vienne  in  Dauphin^.  He 
entered  the  Dominican  Order,  and  was  made  doctor  of  the  Sorbonne,  and 
afterwards  Cardinal.  He  was  a  man  of  commanding  genius,  both  in  the 
speculative  and  practical  order.  He  was  the  first  to  invent  a  concordance 
of  the  Bible.  By  his  suggestion  the  Dominican  Correctorium  was  started, 
and  it  was  finished  by  his  own  personal  labors.  He  is  also  the  author  of 
Commentaries  on  the  Scriptures. 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  XIV.  CENTURY  507 

Hugh  was  hard  pressed  to  keep  with  the  Church,  and  fol- 
low in  everything  St.  Jerome.  He  called  the  deuterocanoni- 
cal  books  dubii,  not  that  their  message  was  uncertain,  but 
because  their  authors  were  unknown,  and  he  admitted  them 
into  the  deposit  of  Scriptures  because,  as  they  contained  the 
inspired  truth,  the  Church  received  them.  The  most  extreme 
of  the  Jeromists  are  forced  always  to  confess  that  the  Church 
received  these  books,  and  that  is  what  we  are  seeking.  We 
wish  to  know  what  the  Church  held  in  these  ages,  not  what 
were  the  personal  leanings  of  the  theologians.  Hugh  declares 
in  his  preface  to  Ecclesiasticus  that  the  Church  receives 
these  books,  not  to  prove  doctrine,  but  for  moral  instruction, 
but  this  is  a  mere  fiction  borrowed  from  Jerome.  The 
Church  received  them  as  Scripture,  and  ''all  Scripture  is 
divinely  inspired."  Hugh  has  commented  all  the  deutero- 
canonical  books. 

William  Occam  (ti347)  appeals  to  Jerome  and  Gregory 
the  Great  in  asserting  that  "Judith,  Tobias,  Maccabees, 
Ecclesiasticus  and  Wisdom  are  not  to  be  accepted  to  con- 
firm that  which  pertains  to  faith.  .  .  .  The  Church  reads 
them,  but  does  not  receive  them  among  her  Canonical  Scrip- 
tures."* 

When  Occam  testifies  that  the  Church  receives  the  deu- 
terocanonical  Scriptures,  he  testifies  to  the  fact  which  we  are 
seeking  to  establish,  and  is  in  line  with  the  whole  course  of 
tradition;  when  he  limits  the  authority  which  the  Church 
accorded  these  books  he  is  advancing  a  mere  personal  criti- 
cism on  a  fact  which  the  Church  had  not  decided.  To  be 
sure,  the  Church  up  to  that  time  had  not  canonized  these 

*  Occam  was  a  native  of  Surrey,  in  England.  He  entered  the  Order  of 
Gray  Friars,  and  became  an  ardent  follower  of  Duns  Scotus.  His  unquiet 
spirit  soon  revealed  itself  in  a  radical  departure  from  Scotus,  and  in  his 
advocacy  of  opposite  subtilties.  He  was  so  powerful  in  dialectics  that 
men  called  him  the  doctor  mvincihilis.  In  Occam  we  find  an  extreme 
representative  of  that  scholastic  hair-splitting  of  dialectics  which  did 
much  to  make  men  distrust  and  despise  the  schoolmen.  Occam  sustained 
the  part  of  Louis  of  Bavaria  against  Pope  John  XXII.,  who  excommuni- 
cated him.  He  was  the  author  of  many  other  bizarre  opinions.  He  died 
at  Munich  in  1347,  according  to  general  opinion  absolved  of  ecclesiastical 
censures. 


508  THE  CANON  OF  THE  XIV.  CENTURY 

books  by  formal  decree;  whereas,  the  first  books  had  beeii 
received  by  her,  canonized  by  the  approbation  of  the  supreme 
authority  of  the  first  covenant;  so  that  the  denial  of  can- 
onicity  was  not  the  denial  of  inspiration.  In  saying  that  the 
Church  did  not  use  these  books  to  confirm  faith,  Occam 
speaks  against  the  plain  evidences  of  fact,  for  we  have  seen 
that  the  representative  men  in  the  Church  from  the  begin- 
ning, made  equal  use  of  these  books  to  teach  doctrine  and 
to  confute  error. 

Nicholas  of  Lyra  (11340)  is  unfavorable  to  the  deutero- 
canonical  books.* 

According  to  him  the  canonical  books  are  of  such  author- 
ity that  anything  that  is  contained  in  them  should  be  firmly 
and  without  discussion  held  as  true,  as  also  that  which  fol- 
lows directly  from  them  .  .  .  but  the  books,  which  according 
to  Jerome,  are  not  of  the  canon  are  received  by  the  Churchy  to 
to  be  read  for  moral  instruction^  although  their  authority 
seems  less  fitted  to  decide  those  questions  concerning  which 
there  might  be  discussion. 

In  his  commentary  on  Ezra  he  says  :  "I  intend,  for  the 
present,  to  pass  over  the  books  of  Tobias,  Judith,  and 
Maccabees,  although  they  are  historical;  because  they 
are  not  in  the  Canon  of  the  Jews  or  Christians.  Jerome 
indeed,  says  they  are  reckoned  among  the  apocrypha."  He 
afterwards  commented  all  the  deuterocanonical  books, 
except  the  fragments  of  Esther,  '  'because  they  are  not  in  the 
Hebrew  nor  in  canonical  Scripture,  but  seem  to  be  invented 
by  Josephus  and  other  writers,  and  inserted  in  the  Vulgate, 
as  Jerome  says."  In  his  preface  to  Tobias  he  says :  ** Since 
by  God's  assistance,  I  have  written  on  the  canonical  books  of 

*Nicolas,  called  of  Lyra  from  his  birthplace  in  Normandy,  was  by  birth 
a  Jew.  He  had  studied  under  the  Rabbis,  but  became  converted  to  the 
faith  of  Christ,  and  entered  the  order  of  the  Friars  Minor  in  1291.  He  re- 
ceived the  degree  of  doctor  at  Paris,  where  he  taught  Scripture  for  many 
years  with  great  success.  He  wrote  commentaries  on  all  the  Scriptures, 
except  some  of  the  deuterocanonical  fragments.  He  was  much  versed  in 
Hebrew  and  Chaldaic,  which  gave  to  his  commentaries  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment a  solidity  unlike  that  found  in  the  other  writers  of  his  time.  He 
founds  all  on  the  literal  sense,  and  thus  is  not  marred  by  that  excessive 
mysticism,  which  has  so  much  prevailed  in  past  ages.     He  died  in  1340- 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  XV.  CENTURY  509 

Holy  Scripture  .  .  .  trusting  in  the  same  assistance,  I  purpose 
to  write  upon  the  other  books,  which  are  not  in  the  canon, 
viz..  Wisdom,  Ecclesiasticus,  Judith,  Tobias  and  Maccabees." 
In  these  testimonies  we  find  two  elements,  first  what  the 
Church  held,  and  second  what  Nicolas  held.  He  bears  wit- 
ness that  the  Church  receives  the  books,  and  she  in  her  sub- 
sequent councils  tells  us  in  what  sense  she  received  them. 
Nicolas  certainly  doubted  of  the  divinity  of  the  deutero- 
canonical  books ;  perhaps  he  fully  judged  that  the  fragments 
of  Esther  were  spurious.  He  was  a  Jew,  and  like  causes 
moved  him  and  Jerome  whom  he  follows.  It  would  be 
unreasonable  to  say  that  the  mere  doubts  of  one  man  or  of  a 
few  men  on  a  question  not  yet  defined  by  the  Church  should 
overthrow  the  weight  of  tradition. 

On  the  4th  of  Februar}^  1441,  Pope  Eugene  IV.,  by 
and  with  the  approbation  of  the  Council  of  Florence  pro- 
mulgated the  following  bull  respecting  Holy  Scripture :  'The 
holy  Roman  Church  .  .  .  professes  that  one  only  and  the  same 
God  is  the  author  of  the  Old  and  New  Testament,  that  is  to 
say,  of  the  Law,  the  Prophets  and  the  Gospels,  because 
under  the  inspiration  of  the  same  Holy  Ghost,  spoke  the  holy 
men  of  both  Testaments  whose  books  the  Church  receives 
and  venerates,  which  are  contained  under  the  following 
titles:  The  five  books  of  Moses  .  .  .  Josue,  Judges,  Ruth, 
four  books  of  Kings,  two  books  of  Chronicles,  Ezra,  Nehe- 
misiSyTobtas,  Judith,  Esther,  Job,  The  Psalms  of  David,  Prov- 
erbs, Ecclesiastes,  Canticle  of  Canticles,  Wisdom,  Eccles- 
iasticus, Isaiah,  Jeremiah  with  Baruch,  Ezechiel,  Daniel, 
twelve  Prophets,  .  .  .  and  the  two  Books  of  Maccabees.''"^ 

*Labbe  Coll.  Concil.  XVIII.  1222.  Concilio  Florentine  perperam 
hoc  decretum  attribui  asserit  Hodius  (De  text.  orig.  659  col.  III.)  et  post 
eum  Bleek  (Einl.  Ed.  2.  p.  705),  etc.  Contra  omnes  hos  ilia  transcribere 
sufficit,  quse  Card,  de  Monte,  primus  Cone.  Trid.  praises,  ad  similem  objec- 
tionem  repondit:  "Bulla  ilia  Eugenii,  in  qua  recipiuntur  libri  sacri  et  est 
super  unione  lacobitarum,  et  eius  data  est  Prid.  Non.  Febr.  1441,  vere 
edita  est  in  Cone.  Florentino  ante  eius  dissolution  em.  Falsum  enim  est,  et 
ab  omni  veritate  alienum,  quod  concilium  illud  dissolutum  fuerit  an. 
1439  statim  post  unionem  Graecorum,  hallucinanturque  maxime,  qui  putant 
finem  dicti  concilii  fuisse  unionem  Grsecorum,  qtium  longe  post,  per  tres 
sc.  fere  annos,  perduraverit,  usque  videlicet  ad  an.  1442,  quo  anno  6.  Kal. 
Mai.  celebrata  10.  sessione,  concilium  ipsum  Romam  translatum  fuerit.  .  . 


510  THE  CANON  OF  THE  XV.  CENTURY 

We  see  here  that  the  Church  attributed  no  importance  to 
the  individual  doubts  and  theories  of  the  writers  whom  we 
have  cited  in  opposition  to  the  books  of  the  second  Canon. 
With  no  evidence  of  uncertainty,  she  announces  here  what 
she  had  held  in  practice  from  the  beginning.  The  dogmatic 
import  of  this  decree  is  incontestable,  but  still  it  did  not  abso- 
lutely settle  the  question.  The  Council  promulgated  a  list 
of  inspired  books  which  the  Church  received  as  the  work  of 
God,  but  it  did  not  use  the  word  canonical.  Now  perhaps 
none  of  those  who  had  opposed  the  full  authority  of  the  deu- 
terocanonical  books  had  denied  their  inspiration.  No  one  of 
them  had  studied  the  exact  concept  of  inspiration  or  canon- 
icity,  but  they  had  made  use  of  vague  distinctions  to  restrict 
the  dignity  and  value  of  the  deuterocanonical  books  some- 
what below  that  of  the  books  of  the  first  Canon.  Moreover, 
the  bull  of  Eugene  IV.  did  not  define  the  Catholic  notion  of 
canonicity,  neither  did  it  define  the  question  of  the  absolute 
equality  of  all  the  books .  It  seems  also  that  the  decrees  of  the 
Council  of  Florence  were  not  diffused  much  through  the 
Western  Church  in  the  first  years  after  its  celebration.  Its 
legislation  affected  more  especially  the  Eastern  world,  and 
the  art  of  printing  had  not  yet  effected  the  general  diffusion 

Prasterea,quod  bulla  unionis  lacobitarum  data  1441,  in  qua  ipsi  libri  reci- 
piuntur,  edita  fuerit  in  ipso  concilio,  potest  sciri  ex  originali  manu  pro- 
pria ipsius  Eugenii  et  Cardinalium  ibi  prsesentium  subscripta  et  plumbeo 
sigillo  obsignata,  quam  ego  ipse  his  oculis  vidi  Romas  una  cum  aliis  actis 
concilii  ab  eisdem  Eugenio  et  Cardinalibus  subscriptis  et  plumbeo  sigillo 
obsignatis,  quae  nunc  in  arce  molis  Adriani  inter  alias  scripturas  Sedis 
Apostolicas  conservantur.  .  .  .  Verba  autem:  'sacro  approbante  concilio,' 
in  principio  bullae  unionis  lacobitarum  non  ponuntur,  quia  dictum  princi- 
pium  totum  pertinet  ad  prooemium ;  ubi  autem  incipit  dispositiva,  ponun- 
tur quidem,  ut  in  aliis  bullis  in  concilio  editis.  Ibi  enim  sic  habetur: 
'veram  necessariamque  doctrinam  hodie  in  hac  solemni  sessione,  sacro 
approbante  Q^cumenico  Concilio  Florentino  in  nomine  Domini  tradimus. 
etc'  "  {Theiner  Acta  genuina  SS.  oecumen.  Cone.  Trident.  Zagrabias 
1847  I.  p.  79,  sq.  Cfr.  etiam  Praenotata  ad  buUam  unionis  in  Labhe  1.  c.) 
Quod  si  Bleeh  (1.  c.)  post  Keerl  (Die  Apocryphen  des  A.  T.  1852,  p.  150  sq.) 
asserit,  ante  Concilium  Tridentinum  neminem  quidquam  de  decreto  isto 
audivisse,  ad  eos  refutandos  sufficiet  testimonium  Caietani  ante  primam 
Concilii  Tridentini  indictionem  demortui,  quod  sic  se  habet:  "Cum  hac 
distinctione  discemere  poteris  et  dicta  Augustini  .  .  .  et  scripta  in  Concilio 
Florentino  sub  Eugenio  IV."  etc.  (Cajetani  Com.  in  script.,  Lugd.  1639.) 
(Comely,  op.  cit.) 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  XV.  CENTURY  511 

of  knowledge.    Hence  we  find  writers  after  this  decree  doubt- 
ing of  the  divinity  of  these  books. 

Such  a  one  is  Tostatus,*  Bishop  of  Avila  (ti455). 
Tostatus  gives  evidence  that  he  knew  nothing  of  the 
decree  of  Florence.  He  is  thoroughly  at  sea  on  the  question 
of  the  Canon,  and  from  his  conflicting  statements  it  appears 
evident  that  he  had  not  mastered  the  question,  and  knew 
not  clearly  what  either  himself  or  the  Church  held  on  the 
subject.  Commenting  the  Prologus  Galeatus  of  Jerome,  he 
says:  "It  is  said  that  the  Book  of  Wisdom  is  not  in  the 
Canon,  because  the  Jews  expunged  it  thence;  in  the  begin- 
ning they  received  it,  but  after  they  had  laid  hands  on  Jesus 
and  slain  him,  remembering  the  evident  testimonies  concern- 
ing him  in  the  same  book  .  .  .  taking  counsel,  lest  we  should 
impute  to  them  the  evident  sacfilege,  they  cut  the  book  off 
from  the  prophetic  volumes,  and  interdicted  its  reading. 
But  we  on  the  Church's  authority,  receive  the  hook  among  the 
authentic  Scriptures,  and  read  it  at  stated  times  in  the  Church. 
Again,  the  Book  of  Jesus,  the  son  of  Sirach,  is  not  in  the  Jew- 
ish Canon  .  .  .  and  although  the  Jews  never  received  it  into 
the  Canon  of  Scriptures,  the  Church  receives  it  and  reads  it.'' 
Of  the  Book  of  Judith  he  speaks  in  a  confused  manner,  and 
concludes:  'These  things  are  true  according  to  the  Jews; 
but  with  us  it  is  otherwise,  for  the  Book  of  Judith  is  received 
among  the  authentic  Scriptures,  for  the  reason  that  the  Church 
approved  it  in  the  Council  of  Nice,  and  received  it  into  the 
Canon  of  Scriptures ;  otherwise  the  Church  would  not  read  it 
in  her  divine  liturgy,  as  she  reads  the  other  authentic  books." 
Continuing,  he  asserts  the  very  same  of  Tobias  and  Maccabees . 
Had  he  remained  consistent  in  these  views,  no  one  could  have 
written  better  on  the  question  than  he.  This  was  the 
Church's  position  clearly  and  definitely  enunciated.  But  in 
trying  to  reconcile  this  position  of  the  Church  with  Jerome, 

*Tostatus  was  one  of  the  most  noted  of  the  doctors  of  Salamanca  in 
Spain.  He  filled  with  credit  the  highest  offices  in  Church  and  State.  His 
works  reveal  a  vast  erudition,  but  his  critique  is  often  defective,  and  his 
judgment  does  ribt  correspond  to  the  vastness  of  his  erudition.  Bellar- 
mine  styled  him  the  wonder  of  the  world.  He  died  in  1455.  This  is  his 
epitaph : 

"Hie  stupor  est  mundi,  qui  scibile  discutit  omne." 


512  THE  CANON  OF  THE  XV.  CENTURY 

he  becomes  oblivious  of  his  former  position  and  assails  the 
authority  of  the  books  which  he  here  calls  authentic  Scrip- 
ture. Commenting  the  first  preface  of  Jerome  on  Chronicles, 
he  speaks  thus  of  the  deuterocanonical  books :  '  There  is  a 
difference  between  them  (deuterocanonical  books)  and  the 
canonical  books  that  are  called  authentic  (in  his  former  testi- 
mony he  called  all  the  deuterocanonical  books  authentic) ; 
from  the  authentic  books  we  may  receive  a  proof  of  doctrine, 
and  validly  argue  against  both  Jew  and  Christian  to  prove 
truth ;  but  from  the  apocryphal  (deuterocanonical)  books  we 
may  receive  doctrine,  because  they  contain  holy  doctrine, 
wherefore  they  are  called  at  times  hagiographa;  but  their 
authority  is  not  sufficient  to  adduce  in  argument  against  any- 
one, nor  to  prove  things  which  are  in  doubt,  and  in  this  they 
are  inferior  to  the  canonical  and  authentic  books.  .  .  None 
of  these  apocryphal  books,  even  though  it  be  included  among 
the  other  books  of  the  Bible,  and  read  in  the  Church,  is  of 
such  authority  that  the  Church  may  from  it  prove  doctrine 
and  in  this  regard  the  Church  does  not  receive  them,  and 
thus  is  to  be  understood  the  declaration  of  Jerome,  that  the 
Church  receives  not  the  apocrypha."  Again,  in  explaining 
the  prologue  on  the  Gospels,  he  states :  "The  Church  knows 
not  whether  writers  inspired  by  the  Holy  Ghost  wrote  these 
(deuterocanonical)  books  .  .  .  When,  therefore,  there  is  doubt 
concerning  the  writers  of  certain  books,  whether  they  were 
inspired  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  their  authority  is  taken  away, 
and  the  Church  does  not  place  them  in  the  Canon  of  Scrip- 
tures. Furthermore,  regarding  these  books,  the  Church  is 
not  certain  whether  or  not  heretics  have  not  added  to,  or 
taken  from  that  which  was  written  by  their  proper  authors. 
The  Church,  therefore,  receives  such  books,  permitting  every 
one  of  the  faithful  to  read  them ;  the  Church  also  reads  them 
in  her  offices  on  account  of  the  many  devout  things  which 
are  contained  in  them ;  but  she  obliges  no  one  to  believe  what 
is  contained  therein,  as  is  the  case  with  the  books  of  Wisdom, 
Ecclesiasticus,  Maccabees,  Judith  and  Tobias.  For  though 
these  books  are  received  b}^  Christians,  and  f)roof  derived 
from  them  in  some  degree  may  have  weight,  because  the 
Church  retains  those  books,  yet  they  are  not  effectual  to 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  XV.  CENTURY  513 

prove  those  things  that  are  in  doubt  against  heretics  and 
Jews,  as  Jerome  says  in  his  prologue  upon  Judith." 

We  must  agree  with  Tostatus  that  up  to  the  Florentine 
Council  the  deuterocanonical  books  were  not  of  absolute 
authority  in  doctrine,  because  there  existed  no  definitive 
decree,  and  therefore  one  who  rejected  these  books  could  not 
be  branded  with  heresy.  He  errs  greatly,  however,  in  say- 
ing that  the  Church  was  ignorant  of  the  inspiration  of  the 
books.  The  contradictions  in  Tostatus  result  from  the  fact 
that  he  tried  to  keep  in  line  with  the  Church,  and  St. 
Jerome.  In  saying  that  the  Church  received  these  books  as 
authentic  Scriptures  into  the  Canon  of  Scriptures,  he  is  with 
the  Church:  in  doubting  of  the  inspiration  of  the  same  books, 
he  is  with  Jerome  against  the  Church.  We  are  building  our 
Canon  on  what  the  Church  held,  and  to  this  his  testimony 
serves. 

The  authority  of  Antoninus,  Archbishop  of  Florence 
(ti459)  is  sometimes  invoked  against  us.  He  knew  but 
vaguely  of  the  decree  of  Florence.*  According  to  him, 
"the  Church  receives  these  books  as  true,  and  venerates 
them  as  useful,  moral  treatises,  though,  in  the  discussion  of 
those  things  which  are  of  faith,  not  conclusive  in  argument. 
.  .  .  Wherefore,  perhaps,  they  have  such  authority  as  have 
the  sayings  of  holy  doctors  approved  by  the  Church." 

The  opinions  of  Antoninus  are  often  strange  and  uncriti- 
cal. His  piety  moved  him  to  an  excessive  veneration  of  the 
opinions  of  St.  Jerome,  in  explaining  the  fact  of  the  Church's 
approval  of  the  deuterocanonical  books.  His  testimony  is 
of  no  avail,  since  against  him  stands  the  authentic  decree  of 
Florence,  making  known  to  us,  that  the  Church  received 
these  books  as  divine  Scripture.  St.  Antoninus  quotes  St. 
Thomas,  H.  2.,  as  authority  for  his  strange  opinion,  but  a 
close  examination  fails  to  disclose  any  such  text  in  the 
Summa. 

*Chron.  III.  11,  2,  Lugd  1586.  III.  p.  551:  "In  aliquibus  vero,  in 
quibus  a  fide  vera  discrepabant  (Jacobitas  et  Armenii)  prohibentur,  uti 
quod  sacramentum  confirmationis  non  habebant  in  usu  conferendi  illi 
nationi,  declarato  eis,  quod  illud,  sicut  et  cetera  sacramenta  deberent 
accipere,  credere  et  conferre,  et  aliqua  alia,  quae  nunc  non  occurrunt  rnenti." 

33  (H.S.) 


614  THE  CANON  OF  THE  XVI.  CENTURY 

Denis  of  Chartreux  (ti47i)  declares,  that  the  Church 
receives  the  deuterocanonical  books  as  true,  but  not  ca- 
nonical. He  does  not  regard  the  fragments  of  Esther  as 
divine  Scripture. 

Cardinal  Ximenes  (fisiy),  in  the  preface  of  his  Com- 
plutensian  Polyglott  Bible,  says:  "The  books,  indeed, 
without  the  Canon,  which  the  Church  receives  rather  for  the 
edification  of  the  people  than  as  an  authoritative  confirma- 
tion of  the  doctrines  of  the  Church,  are  only  found  in  the 
Greek." 

We  see  that  the  old  theory  of  Jerome  endured  in  some 
minds,  who,  while  they  received  the  books  with  the  Church, 
in  defect  of  any  absolute  decree  of  the  Church,  inclined  much 
to  the  great  Scriptural  doctor  of  the  Church.  The  decree  of 
Florence,  though  it  defined  the  issue  in  se,  failed  to  establish 
the  absolute  equality  of  the  books,  first  because  it  was  not 
widely  disseminated  in  those  obscure  times,  and  secondly 
because  it  did  not  employ  the  term  canonical. 

Erasmus  (11536)  finds  "that  it  is  not  unreasonable  to 
establish  different  degrees  of  authority  among  the  Holy 
Books,  as  St.  Augustine  has  done.  The  books  of  the  first 
rank  are  those  concerning  which  there  has  never  existed  a 
doubt  with  the  ancients.  Certainly  Isaiah  has  more  weight 
than  Judith."* 

The  great  humanist  evidently  considered  the  books  as 
divine  Scripture,  though  of  less  importance  in  doctrine. 

We  close  the  list  of  the  antetridentine  writers  with  Cajetan 
(11524).  At  the  close  of  his  commentary  on  Esther  he  con- 
cludes: "The  Church  receives  such  books,  permitting  the 
faithful  to  read  them;  the  Church  also  reads  them  in  her 
offices,  on  account  of  the  many  devout  things  whcih  they 
contain.  But  the  Church  obliges  no  one  necessarily  to  believe 
what  is  contained  therein,  which  is  the  case  with  the  books  of 
Wisdom,  Ecclesiasticus,  Maccabees,  Judith,  and  Tobit.  For 
though  these  books  are  received  by  Christians,  and  proof 
derived  from  them  may,  in  some  way  or  other,  have  weight, 
because  the  Church  retains  those  books;  yet  they  are  not 

*Apud  Malou,  II.  io8. 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  XVI.  CENTURY  515 

effectual  for  proving  those  things  which  are  in  doubt,  against 
heretics  or  Jews.  We  here  terminate  our  commentaries  on 
the  historical  books  of  the  Old  Testament :  for  the  rest  (viz., 
the  books  of  Judith,  Tobit,  and  the  Maccabees)  are  reckoned 
by  Jerome  without  the  canonical  books,  and  are  placed  among 
the  apocrypha,  together  with  Wisdom  and  Ecclesiasticus,  as 
appears  in  his  Trologus  Galeatus'  (or  Helmeted  Prologue). 
Nor  should  you  be  disturbed,  O  novice,  if  you  should  any- 
where find  those  books  reckoned  among  the  canonical  books, 
either  in  the  holy  councils,  or  in  the  holy  doctors.  For  the 
words  of  the  councils,  as  well  as  of  the  doctors,  are  to  be 
submitted  to  the  correction  of  Jerome ;  and  according  to  his 
judgment  [expressed]  to  the  bishops  Chromatius  and  Helio- 
dorus,  those  books  (and  if  there  be  any  similar  ones  in  the 
Canon  of  the  Bible)  are  not  canonical,  that  is,  they  are  not 
those  which  are  given  as  a  rule  for  the  confirmation  of  the 
faith.  They  may,  however,  be  called  canonical  (that  is, 
given  as  a  rule)  for  the  edification  of  the  faithful ;  since  [they 
are]  received  and  authorized  in  the  Canon  of  the  Bible  for 
this  purpose." 

Cajetan  was  not  a  strong  independent  thinker.  He  gave 
himself  up  to  study  in  two  great  departments  of  the  Church's 
science,  dogma  and  Scripture.  In  both,  he  simply  followed 
the  master.  In  dogma  he  followed  St.  Thomas,  absolutely; 
in  Scripture  he  followed  in  the  same  manner  St.  Jerome. 
Study  for  him  simply  meant  to  find  out  what  these  two  men 
held.  He  paid  slight  heed  to  the  other  theologians  of  his 
time.  Thomas  and  Jerome  for  him  were  supreme.  His 
writings  are  characterized  by  a  certain  self-assurance  and 
contempt  for  the  opinions  of  others,  indicative  of  a  narrow 
mind.  The  compass  of  his  knowledge  had  been  narrowed 
by  exclusive  devotion  to  the  Summa.  Cajetan  is  the  author 
of  many  strange  opinions,  some  of  them  directly  opposed 
to  faith.  Certainly  when  he  says  that  the  decrees  of  general 
councils  must  be  submitted  to  the  correction  of  Jerome,  the 
statement  is  false.  It  was  placing  Jerome  above  the  Church. 
And  yet  this  extreme  Jeromist  had  to  confess  that  the  deu- 
terocanonical  books  were  received  and  atithorized  in  the  Canon 
of  the  Bible. 


516         DECREE  OF  THE  COUNCIL  OF  TRENT 

Chapter  XL 
Decree  of  the  Council  of  Trent. 

The  necessity  for  the  decree  of  Trent  arose  from  two 
quarters.  Within  the  fold  of  the  Church  there  was  some 
uncertainty  produced  by  the  opinion  of  Cajetan;  and  the 
sect  of  protestants  which  arose  at  this  time  rejected  the  deu- 
terocanonical  books.  To  make  head,  therefore,  against  the 
great  apostasy  and  to  make  known  to  CathoHcs  the  abso- 
lute position  of  the  Church,  the  Council  of  Trent,  was  opened 
on  the  15th  of  December,  1545.  The  first  deliberations  of 
the  Council  were  concerned  with  the  question  of  Holy  Scrip- 
ture. An  evidence  of  the  views  of  the  protestants  on  the 
Scripture  may  be  learned  from  the  following  statement  of 
Luther :  .  "That  which  does  not  teach  Christ  is  not  apostolic, 
even  if  Peter  or  Paul  said  it;  on  the  contrary,  that  which 
announces  Christ  is  apostolic,  even  though  uttered  by  Judas, 
Annas,  Herod  or  Pilate." 

In  the  famous  dispute  of  Leipsic  in  15 19,  when  John  Eck 
invoked  the  authority  of  Maccabees  to  defend  the  doctrine 
of  Purgatory,  Luther  made  answer:  "There  is  no  proof  of 
Purgatory  in  any  portion  of  sacred  Scripture,  which  can 
enter  into  the  argument,  and  serve  as  a  proof ;  for  the  book 
of  Maccabees  not  being  in  the  Canon,  is  of  weight  with  the 
faithful,  but  avails  nothing  with  the  obstinate."  In  the 
spread  of  these  extreme  ideas,  men  looked  to  the  Church  for 
a  definition,  and  she  responded  to  the  need. 

A  Council  held  at  Sens,  in  1 528  declared,that  he  who  held 
not  the  tradition  of  the  Church,  and  rejected  the  decrees  of 
the  Third  Council  of  Carthage,  and  those  of  Popes  Innocent 
and  Gelasius,  should  be  condemned  as  a  schismatic,  and 
inventor  of  all  heresies ;  but  tliis  body  was  only  local,  and 
could  not  command  all  men's  faith ;  wherefore  a  decree  from 
the  supreme  authority  in  the  Church  was  necessary.  On  the 
nth  of  February,  1546,  the  members  of  the  Council,  who 
had  been  divided  into  three  particular  congregations, 
assembled.  The  subject  of  deliberation  respecting  the 
Canon  was : 


DECREE    OF   THE    COUNCIL   OF   TRENT  517 

I. — Whether  the  Council  should  receive  the  books  of 
Scripture  simply,  or  after  a  previous  examination  by  the 
theologians. 

2. — Whether  two  classes  of  books  should  be  constituted, 
so  that  some  should  be  declared  authoritative  to  prove 
doctrine;  others  useful  for  instruction.  (Acta  Genuina, 
Theiner.) 

Cardinal  Cervini,  president  of  the  Council,  afterwards 
Pope  Marcellus  II.,  proposed  the  questions  in  all  their  bear- 
ings to  the  Fathers.*  Certain  Fathers  were  of  the  mind  that 
it  would  be  well  to  examine,  at  least  summarily,  the  objec- 
tions of  the  adversaries  against  the  deuterocanonical  books, 
but  the  majority  decided  **to  receive  the  books  simply  and 
entirely  as  the  Church  had  done  in  other  councils,  and  espe- 
cially in  the  Council  of  Florence."     (Theiner  1.  c.) 

We  see  here  that  thercvwas  no  new  legislation  in  this 
regard  in  the  Council  of  Trent.  The  Council  simply  re- 
iterated and  confirmed  what  had  been  believed  and  pro- 
mlilgated  in  the  Church  from  the  earliest  times. 

The  question  was  then  submitted  by  the  general  of  the 
Augustinians,  and  Seripando,  legate  of  Paul  IV.,  "that  a 
distinction  should  be  made  between  those  books  which"  are 
authentic  and  canonical,  and  upon  which  our  faith  rests,  and 
those  which  are  merely  canonical,  and  useful  to  be  read  for 
instruction  in  the  Church,  as  St.  Jerome  places  in  the  Pro- 
logus  Galeatus."  (Theiner  1.  c.)  This  proposition  found 
no  favor  and  was  straightway  abandoned. 

In  the  Council  of  Trent,  we  find  often  a  lack  of  precision 
in  the  views  of  individual  members;  but  the  conclusions 
arrived  at  are  always  clear  and  profound. 

*Duo  ego  subiiciam,  quae  in  mea  particulari  congregatione  tractata 
fuerunt;  unum  est,  utrum  simpliciter  facienda  sit  approbatio  Scripturag, 
proiit  factum  fuit  per  Cone.  Florent.et  iuxta  etiam  antiquiora concilia,  an 
potius  distinguendum ;  qui  sint  libri  sacri,  ex  quibus  fundamenta  nostras 
fidei  et  doctrinae  eruantur,  et  qui  sint  quidem  canonici,  sed  non  eiusdem 
auctoritatis,  ut  priores  illi,  sed  ideo  ab  Ecclesia  recepti,  ut  ex  his  multitudo 
instrui  possit,  quales  sunt  libri  Sapientiw,  Praverbiorum,  et  alii  similes; 
idque  forsan  non  abs  re  esset,  quoniam  videtur  ankbiguum  ab  Ecclesia 
determinatum,  quamvis  et  Augustinus  et  Hieronymus  et  alii  veteres  de 
lis  nonnuUa  tradiderint.     Alterum  est,  utrum  sicco  pede  approbatio  ista 


518         DECREE  OF  THE  COUNCIL  OF  TRENT 

So  here,  it  is  not  evident  just  what  distinction  this  man 
wished  to  induce.  But  in  every  case,  his  proposition  was 
useless.  If  he  wished  merely  to  say  that  the  import  of 
some  divine  books  is  more  important  in  Christian  doctrine 
than  others,  the  truth  is  understood  by  all  Christians,  and 
needs  no  definition.  The  Council  was  not  about  to  define 
that  Maccabees  was  as  valuable  to  use  as  Matthew.  But  if 
he  wished  to  say  that  the  relation  which  God  bore  to  any 
book  was  less  than  inspiration  as  we  have  defined  it,  the 
proposition  is  false.  The  Council  simply  extended  proper 
inspiration  to  all  the  books,  and  left  the  question  of  their 
respective  dogmatic  and  moral  values  intact. 

On  the  1 2th  of  February,  1546,  Cardinal  Cervini  moved 
on  the  part  of  his  particular  congregation  that  the  Council 
set  forth  in  brief  the  motives  why  it  receives  the  books  con- 
tested by  the  protestants ;  but  it  was  decided  by  common 
accord  "that  the  Holy  Books  should  be  simply  approved 
according  to  the  decree  of  the  Council  of  Florence."  (Thei- 
ner,  I.  52.) 

The  next  question  was  whether  the  books  of  both  classes 
should  be  received  with  the  same  reverence,  (pari  pietatis 
affectu).  This  was  for  a  long  time  discussed,  the  majority 
being  in  favor  of  the  affirmative,  but  no  conclusion  was  then 
reached.  The  following  meetings,  both  particular  and  gen- 
eral, were  given  up  to  various  questions  regarding  Scripture 
and  tradition.  On  the  2  2d  of  March  the  secretary  of  the 
Council,  Angelo  Massarelli,  proposed  to  reject  the  decree  of 
the  Council  of  Florence  as  of  doubtful  authenticity,  but  he 
was  refuted  by  the  president  of  the  Council.  Cardinal  Del 
Monte,  legate  of  the  Pope,  had,  on  the  26th  of  February, 
refuted  the  same  objection. 

facienda  sit,  an  vero  additis  rationibus  et  solutis  argumentis,  quibus  adver- 
sarii  maxime  innituntur  ad  eorum  nonnullos  impugnandos  et  confring- 
endos.  Ab  ipsis  enim,  ut  omnes  vos  scitis,  infringitur  imprimis  Hher 
Machahceorum,  quem  penitus  reiiciunt,  itemi  Epistola  Pauli  ad  Hebr.,  una 
lacobi  et  altera  Petri  ac  etiam  Apocalypsis  et  alia  pleraque."  Acta 
genuina  p.  52. — Quod  Proverhiorum  liber  cum  Sapientia  coniungatur, 
lapsum  calami  diceres,  nisi  etiam  Pallavicini  (1.  c.  I.  p.  220)  haberet: 
"Proverbiorum  et  Sapientias  libri."      (Comely,  op.  cit.) 


DECREE  OF  THE  COUNCIL  OF  TRENT         519 

A  detailed  list  of  fourteen  propositions  was  at  this  junc- 
ture drawn  up  to  he  examined  and  voted  on  in  detail.  Not 
all  these  regard  our  question.  The  tenth  contains  the  pith 
of  our  present  theme.  This  was  whether  the  deuterocanoni- 
cal  books  should  be  approved  as  sacred  and  canonical.  This 
was  resolved  in  the  affirmative  by  forty-four  votes,  against 
three  negative  votes  and  five  doubtful  ones.     (Theiner,  I. 

77.) 

The  thirteenth  proposition  submitted  the  question, 
whether  to  make  a  distinction  between  the  two  classes  of 
books,  or  enumerate  them  according  to  the  Council  of  Flor- 
ence. It  was  decided  to  receive  the  deuterocanonical  books 
without  examination  or  discussion  by  forty-one  votes,  against 
four  in  opposition  and  eight  doubtful  ones.  The  Council 
also  unanimously  decided  that  the  things  carried  by  a  major- 
ity vote  should  not  be  subject  to  further  discussion. 

On  the  3rd  of  April,  the  corrected  Schema  was  placed 
before  the  Fathers.  The  Cardinal  of  Trent  moved  that  the 
deuterocanonical  books  be  placed  after  the  protocanonical 
ones,  "because  Tobias,  which  Jerome  held  to  be  apocryphal, 
is  placed  in  the  decree  ahead  of  other  books  whose  authority 
no  one  has  ever  questioned."  The  motion  was  lost,  since  it 
was  against  the  former  vote  that  they  should  approve  the 
decree  of  the  Council  of  Florence. 

The  Bishop  of  Castellamare  remarked  that  the  words 
sacred  and  canonical  were  objectionable  on  account  of  Judith, 
and  some  others  which  are  not  in  the  Hebrew  Canon.  He 
moved  to  substitute:  "in  the  Canon  of  the  Church."  Car- 
dinal Cervini,  the  president,  responded:  *Tt  is  true  what 
thou  sayest,  but  we  follow  the  Canon  of  the  Church,  not  of 
the  Jews.  When  we  say  Canonical,  therefore,  we  understand 
of  the  Canon  of  the  Church."  And  the  Bishop  of  Castella- 
mare responded :  '  'Placet . ' ' 

On  the  8th  of  April,  1546,  two  months  after  the  question 
of  the  Scriptures  had  been  submitted  to  the  Council,  after 
mature  deliberation  and  discussion,  the  Council  promulgated 
its  famous  decree : 

"The  thrice  holy,  oecumenical,  general  Council  of  Trent 
.  .  .  following  the  examples  of  the  orthodox  Fathers,  receives 


520  DECREE    OF   THE    COUNCIL    OF   TRENT 

and  venerates  with  equal  piety  and  respect  all  the  books  of 
the  Old  and  New  Testament,  because  one  and  the  same  God 
is  the  author  of  both.  ,  .  .  The  Council  judges  good  to  join 
to  this  decree  a  list  of  books,  so  that  no  one  may  doubt  con- 
cerning the  books  received  by  the  same  Synod.  These  are 
the  books:  Of  the  Old  Testament,  the  five  books  of  Moses, 
that  is  to  say :  Genesis,  Exodus,  Leviticus,  Numbers,  Deu- 
teronomy; Joshua,  Judges,  Ruth,  four  books  of  Kings,  two 
of  Chronicles,  the  first  of  Ezra;  and  second  which  is  called 
Nehemiah,  Tobias,  Judith,  Esther,  Job,  the  Davidic  Psalter 
of  one  hundred  and  fifty  Psalms,  Proverbs,  Ecclesiastes, 
Canticle  of  Canticles,  Wisdom,  Ecclesiasticus,  Isaiah,  Jere- 
miah with  Baruch,  Ezechiel,  Daniel,  the  twelve  minor  Proph- 
ets, viz.,  Hosea,  Joel,  Amos,  Abdias,  Jonas,  Micha,  Nahum, 
Habacuc,  Sophonias,  Haggai,  Zachary,  Malachi,  the  two 
books  of  Maccabees,  first  and  second.  ...  If  anyone  shall 
not  receive  these  same  books  as  sacred  and  Canonical  with 
all  their  parts,  as  they  are  read  in  the  Catholic  Church,  and 
contained  in  the  Latin  \^ulgate ;  and  shall  knowingly  and  wil- 
fully reject  the  aforesaid  traditions,  let  him  be  anathema."* 

The  clause,  with  all  their  parts,  was  inserted  primarily  to 
include  certain  passages  of  the  Gospels,  concerning  which 
doubt  had  existed.  In  the  general  congregation  on  the  2  7th 
of  March,  1546,  Cardinal  Pacheco  asked  that  these  portions 
of  the  New  Testament  should  be  specially  mentioned.  The 
words  of  the  decree  are  of  such  comprehension  that  they 
include  all  parts,  annulling  all  doubts  that  had  existed  both 
concerning  the  Old  and  the  New  Testaments. 

In  virtue  of  this  decree,  every  Catholic  must  accept  as 
divinely  inspired,  the  deuterocanonical  books  and  fragments 
as  they  are  read  in  the  Latin  Vulgate.  The  Council  did  not 
treat  this  as  an  open  question,  but  added  corroboration  and 
precision  to  preceding  documents.  The  history  of  the  Coun- 
cil by  Pallavicini  might  induce  one  into  error.  He  states 
that  the  question  was  submitted,  whether  all  the  books  of 
both  Testaments  should  be  approved.  This  would  imply 
that  the  Council  felt  itself  not  bound  by  the  Council  of  Flor- 

*Conc.  Trid.  Sess.  IV.  De  Can.  Script. 


DECREE    OF   THE    COUNCIL   OF   TRENT  521 

ence.     The  authentic  acts  by  Theiner  give  an  entirely  differ- 
ent sense  to  the  dehberation.     The  proposal  was  couched  in 
these  terms:     That  in  the  proximate  session,  the  books  of 
Holy  Scripture  should  be  received,  and  the  way  and  manner 
determined,  in  in  which  they  should  be  received.     To  be 
sure,  the  discussion  of  the  project  revealed  much  lack  of 
clearness  in  the  ideas  of  certain  Fathers,  but  the  great  body 
of  the  Council  always  treated  the  question  as  decided  by  the 
existing  documents  of  the  Church.     The  Council  of  Trent 
admitted  no  different  degrees  of  inspiration  in  the  Holy 
Books,  because  inspiration  has  no  degrees.     A  book  is  either 
the  product  of  God's  authorship,  or  it  is  not.     The  Council 
accepted  the  deuterocanonical  books  as  having  God  for  their 
author.     The  old  distinction  of  greater  and  less  degrees  of 
inspiration  had  some  ardent  supporters  in  the  Council.     The 
ground  of  their  opinion  seems  to  have  been  an  imperfect 
understanding  of  the  nature  of  inspiration.     The  vast  major- 
ity of  the  Council  announced  to  them :     *  'All  the  books  of  our 
Bible,  whatever  be  their  contents,  and  the  profit  one  may 
draw  from  them,  have  been  regarded  as  inspired  by  Chris- 
tian tradition,  and  for  us,  they  are  canonical."      The  oppo- 
nents finished  by  adding  their  placet.    The  absolute  equality 
of  all  the  books  in  their  inspiration  is  assured  by  the  Council ; 
for  if  a  book  be  sacred  and  canonical,  and  have  God  for  its 
author,  it  cannot  be  inferior  to  the  others  of  which  the  same 
is  asserted.     Some  theologians  still  confuse  the  issue  by 
declaring  that  the  question  of  equality  was  not  explicitly 
defined  on  account  of  its  difficulty;  and  the  question  zvas  left  as 
the  Holy  Fathers  left  it.     (Loisy,  1.  c) .     This  is  nothing.      The 
Council  did  not  deem  it  necessary  to  promulgate  an  explicit 
decree,  making  the  book  equal  in  inspiration,  because  such 
was  equivalently  contained  in  the  main  decree;  the  Council 
did  not  declare  the  books  equal  in  value,  because  they  are  not 
thus  equal:  God  spoke  in  divers  manners  in  the  Scriptures, 
and  some  truths  therein  contained  are  more  valuable  than 
others,  though  these  latter  are  no  less  the  inspired  writing  of 
God. 

The  decree  of  Trent  was  definite,  final  and  clear  but  yet  it 
took  some  time  for  it  to  take  absolute  hold  upon  all  the  rep- 


522  DECREE   OF   THE    COUNCIL   OF   TRENT 

resentatives  of  Catholic  thought.  If  men's  minds  were 
always  clear  and  virtuous,  there  would  be  far  less  confusion 
in  the  world.  But  often  from  lack  of  intellectual  penetra- 
tion, or  from  excessive  addiction  to  some  theory,  men  of  note 
give  utterance  to  false  opinions.  Especially  is  this  true  in 
the  harmonizing  of  schools  of  theology,  with  some  definitive 
sentence  of  the  Church.  Those  who  have  assimilated  -^ome 
theory  in  conflict  with  the  new  decree,  will  retreat  from  their 
position  slowly,  and  will  endeavor,  by  restricting  the  decree, 
to  cling  to  as  much  as  possible  of  the  old  opinion.  Thus 
Cajetan  tried  to  conform  the  decree  of  Florence  to  his  own 
opinion.  With  time  these  struggles  and  gasps  of  dying 
error  cease,  and  the  authority  of  the  rock-built  Church 
remains  the  absolute  guide  of  the  faithful  of  Christ. 

Thus,  for  a  few  years  after  the  Council  of  Trent,  there 
was  some  slight  friction  between  its  decree  and  certain  theo- 
logians. This  was  augmented  by  the  fact  that  the  precise 
concepts  of  inspiration  and  canonicity  were  not  then  well 
understood.  The  Council  gave  us  the  text,  and,  as  men 
examined  the  precise  significance  of  its  words,  this  looseness 
of  opinion  vanished  from  Catholic  schools  of  theology,  so 
that  every  Catholic  holds  to-day  that  the  deuterocanonical 
books  are  as  much  inspired  and  as  canonical  as  the  Penta- 
teuch or  the  Gospels. 

An  intentional  falsehood  is  contained  in  Home's  Intro- 
duction, Vol.  11.  p.  489,  where  he  places  Bellarmine  (ti62i) 
against  the  deuterocanonical  books,  by  taking  certain  pas- 
sages out  of  their  proper  context  in  the  works  of  the  great 
controversialist.  Bellarmine  in  his  works  clearly  declares: 
"That  the  deuterocanonical  works  are  not  only  good  and 
holy,  but  they  are  sacred  and  of  infallible  truth.  The  Church 
has  never  doubted  of  their  canonicity  in  the  sense  that  she 
lacked  testimonies  to  attest  the  divinity  of  their  origin,  but 
simply  certain  persons  doubted,  and  the  Church  did  not 
wish  to  define  the  question  at  that  time."* 

From  this  it  appears  that  Bellarmine 's  opinion  was  that 
the  deuterocanonical  books  always  had  the  right  to  canon- 


*De  Verbo  Dei.  I.  i,  Cap.  IV. 


DECREE  OF  THE  COUNCIL  OF  TRENT        523 

icity;  they  came  into  actual  enjoyment  of  this  right  by  the 
timely  decree  of  Trent. 

The  aforeS'aid  Home  also  falsely  adduces  the  testimony 
of  SixTus  OF  Sienna.* 

In  his  Bibliotheca  Sancta  (Tom.  i.  pag.  i8),  Sixtus  dis- 
tinguishes two  classes  of  books.  There  he  invented  the 
terms  protocanonical  and  deuterocanontcal,  and  speaks  of  them 
thus:  'The  first  class  is  formed  of  those  books,  which  may 
be  called  protocanonical,  regarding  which  there  has  never 
been  doubt  or  controversy  in  the  Catholic  Church.  The 
second  class  comprises  the  books  which  were  formerly  known 
as  ecclesiastical,  but  which  are  now  by  us  called  deuterocan- 
onical.  These  latter  were  not  recognized  by  all  since  the 
times  of  the  Apostles,  but  long  afterward,  and  for  this  reason 
Catholic  opinion  concerning  them  was,  at  first  uncertain. 
The  early  Fathers  regarded  them  as  apocryphal  and  non- 
canonical,  and  only  permitted  them  to  be  read  to  the  cate- 
chumens ;  then  with  time  they  permitted  them  to  be  read  to 
the  faithful,  not  for  proof  of  doctrine,  but  for  edification  of 
the  faithful ;  and  since  these  books  were  read  publicly  in  the 
Church,  they  were  called  ecclesiastical.  Finally,  they  have 
been  placed  among  the  Scriptures  of  irrefragable  authority.'' 

Sixtus  exaggerates  the  doubts  that  existed  concerning 
the  books.  He  was  probably  more  conversant  with  Jerome 
than  with  the  other  Fathers,  and  takes  him  as  a  representa- 
tive of  the  opinions  of  his  time.  Against  his  testimony 
stands  the  united  testimony  of  the  Council  of  Trent,  com- 
posed of  the  greatest  body  of  theologians  ever  assembled, 
declaring  that  the  Church,  relying  on  tradition,  receives  these 
books  as  sacred  and  canonical.  The  Council  promulgated 
officially  what  had  been  always  implicitly  held.     But  Sixtus 

*Sixtus  was  by  birth  a  Jew.  He  became  converted  to  Christianity, 
and  entered  the  Franciscan  order.  He  was  afterwards  convicted  of  having 
taught  heresies;  and  as  he  obstinately  refused  to  abjure  them,  he  was  con- 
demned to  be  burned  at  the  stake  Just  as  the  sentence  was  to  be  ex- 
ecuted, Cardinal  Ghisleri,  the  Inquisitor-General,  afterwards  Pope  Pius  V., 
overcame  his  obstinacy,  and  transferred  him  from  the  Franciscans  to  the 
Dominican  order.  He  consecrated  his  life  to  the  study  of  the  Scriptures, 
and  died  at  Genoa,  in  1569.  His  greatest  work  is  his  Bibliotheca  Sancta. 
Many  of  his  opinions  are  excellent,  but,  at  times,  his  critique  is  defective. 


524         DECREE  OF  THE  COUNCIL  OF  TRENT 

is  disposed  to  accord  these  books  a  place  among  the  canonical 
Scriptures  on  the  authority  of  the  Church.  He  accepts  the 
decree,  as  he  understands  it.  But  the  opinions  of  St.  Jerome 
moved  him  still  to  reject  the  deuterocanonical  fragments  of 
Esther.  Thus,  in  the  aforesaid  reference,  he  disct)urses  of 
it:  "The  appendix  of  the  Book  of  Esther,  which  comprises 
the  seven  last  chapters,  consists  of  various  rags  and  patch- 
work, of  which  we  find  nothing  in  the  Hebrew  exemplars  .  .  . 
But  it  occurs  to  me  here  to  admonish  and  entreat  the  good 
reader  not  to  accuse  me  of  temerity,  that  I  cut  out  these 
seven  chapters  from  the  canonical  Scriptures  and  place  them 
among  the  apocrypha,  as  though  I  were  unmindful  of  the 
decree  of  Trent,  which,  imder  pain  of  anathema,  commands 
that  all  the  books  entire  should  be  received,  as  they  are  read 
in  the  Church,  and  as  they  exist  in  the  old  Latin  Vulgate 
edition. 

•'But  that  Canon  is  to  be  understood,  of  true  and  genuine 
parts  of  Scripture,  pertaining  to  the  integrity  of  the  books, 
and  not  of  certain  ragged  appendages,  and  patches  rashly 
and  disorderly  tacked  on  by  some  unknown  author,  such  as 
are  these  last  chapters,  which  not  only  Cardinal  Hugh, 
Nicolas  of  Lyra,  and  Denis  the  Carthusian  deny  to  be  can- 
onical ;  but  also  St.  Jerome  cuts  off  from  the  volume  of  Esther 
as  a  spurious  part,  to  use  his  own  words,  'made  up  of  ragged 
fragments  of  words,  which  could  be  said  and  heard  in  the 
(several)  occasions,  just  as  it  is  customary  for  scholars  to  take 
a  theme,  and  excogitate  what  words  one  would  use,  who 
received  or  wrought  an  injury.  Origen,  also,  in  his  letter  to 
Julius  Africanus,  rejects  these  appendages.'  " 

Sixtus  knew  more  of  the  opinions  of  Jerome,  than  of  the 
value  of  oecumenical  decrees.  No  part  of  the  deuterocan- 
onical books  is  treated  so  severely  by  Jerome  as  the  frag- 
ments of  Esther.  As  it  was  hopeless  to  make  Jerome  agree 
on  this  point  with  the  Council,  as  generally  understood,  this 
avowed  disciple  of  Jerome  sought  by  his  strange  distinction 
to  maintain  the  old  opinion  of  his  master.  But  anyone  can 
see  the  flimsiness  of  the  attempt.  In  fact,  in  the  subsequent 
centuries,  there  is  not  found  one  to  endorse  such  opinion. 
The  words  of  the  Council  were  too  explicit.     Every  part  that 


DECREE    OF   THE    COUNCIL    OF    TRENT  525 

was  in  the  Vulgate  and  read  in  the  Church  was  declared 
sacred  and  canonical;  the  fragments  of  Esther  fulfill  both 
these  conditions.  The  only  way  to  reject  deuterocanonical 
books  and  fragments  is  to  reject  the  Council  of  Trent.  In 
fact  it  is  a  remarkable  fact,  that,  in  the  ages  following  the 
Council,  Sixtus'  is  the  only  voice  raised  in  opposition  to  the 
equal  canonicity  of  the  books,  and  he  only  aims  at  these  frag- 
ments. It  is  an  evidence  of  the  universal  obedience  of  faith, 
among  the  children  of  the  Church,  to  the  voice  of  authority. 

Among  the  authors  of  the  seventeenth  century  Bossuet 
has  expressed  the  position  of  the  Church  with  the  most  force 
and  precision.  In  a  letter  to  Leibnitz  in  1 700,  he  resumes  as 
f  oUow^s : 

"Nous  dirons  done,  s'il  vous  plait,  tous  deux  ensemble, 
qu'une  nouvelle  reconnaissance  de  quelque  livre  canonique 
dont  quelques-uns  auraient  doute  ne  deroge  point  a  la  per- 
petuite  de  la  tradition.  .  .  .  Pour  etre  constante  et  perpetu- 
elle,  la  verite  catholique  ne  laisse  pas  d'avoir  ses  progres :  elle 
est  connue  en  un  lieu  plus  qu'en  un  autre,  en  un  temps  plus 
qu'en  un  autre,  plus  clairement,  plus  distinctement,  plus 
universellement.  II  suffit,  pour  etablir  la  succession  et  la 
perpetuite  de  la  foi  d'un  livre  saint,  comme  de  toute  autre 
verite,  qu'elle  soit  toujours  reconnue;  qu'elle  le  soit  dans  les 
plus  grand  nombre  sans  comparaison ;  qu'elle  le  soit  dans  les 
Eglises  les  plus  eminentes,  les  plus  anciennes  et  les  plus 
reverees;  qu'elle  s'y  soutienne,  qu'elle  gagne  et  qu'elle  se 
repande  d'elle-meme,  jusqu'k  tant  que  le  Saint-Esprit,  la 
force  de  la  tradition  et  le  gout,  non  celui  des  particuliers, 
mais  1 'universal  de  I'Eglise,  la  fasse  enfin  prevaloir  comme 
elle  a  fait  au  concile  de  Trente." 

He  insists  on  the  practical  usage  of  the  Church  in  reading 
the  books,  and  on  the  constant  quotations  of  the  Fathers; 

''Ajoutons  .  .  .  que  le  terme  de  canonique  n'ayant  pas  tou- 
jours une  signification  uniforme,  nier  qu'un  livre  soit  can- 
onique en  un  sens,  ce  n'est  pas  nier  qu'il  ne  le  soit  en  un  autre ; 
nier  qu'il  soit,  ce  qui  est  tres  vrai,  dans  le  canon  des  Hebreux, 
ou  re^u  sans  contradiction  parmi  les  Chretiens,  n'empeche 
pas  qu'il  ne  soit  au  fond  dans  le  canon  de  I'Eglise,  par  I'aut- 
orite  que  lui  donne  la  lecture  presque  gen^rale  et  par  1 'usage 


526  DECREE    OF    THE    COUNCIL    OF    TRENT 

qu'on  en  faisait  par  tout  Tunivers.  C'est  ainsi  qu'il  faut  con- 
cilier  plutot  que  commettre  ensemble  les  Eglises  et  les  auteurs 
ecclesiastiques,  par  des  principes  communs  a  tous  les  divers 
sentiments  et  par  le  retranchement  de  toute  ambiguite." 

The  abbe  Dupin,  a  contemporary  of  Bossuet,  had  at  first 
held  loose  opinions  concerning  the  deuterocanonical  books, 
but  under  the  influence  of  Bossuet,  he  modified  his  position 
to  the  following  clear  and  just  statement : 

''Toutes  ces  raisons  et  ces  considerations  jointes  ensemble 
sont  suffisantes  pour  etablir  I'autorite  de  ces  livres,  dont  la 
definition  du  concile  de  Trente  ne  laisse  aucun  lieu  de  douter. 
Car,  quoiqu'il  ne  se  fasse  point  de  nouvelle  revelation  k  TEg- 
lise,  elle  peut  apres  bien  du  temps  etre  plus  assuree  de  la 
verite  d'un  ouvrage  qu'elle  ne  I'etait  auparavant,  quand, 
apres  I'avoir  bien  examine,  elle  a  trouve  un  legitime  fonde- 
ment  de  n'en  plus  douter  et  une  tradition  suffisante  dans 
quelques  Eglises  pour  le  juger  authentique.  C'est  la  raison 
pour  laquelle  saint  Jerome  dit  que  la  seconde  epitre  de  Saint 
Pierre  avait  acquis  de  I'autorite  par  I'antiquite  et  par  I'usage, 
et  meritait  d'etre  mise  au  rang  des  livres  sacres  du  Noveau 
Testament.* 

Bernard  Lamy  (tiyis),  of  the  Congregation  of  the  Ora- 
tory, has  a  singular  opinion  concerning  the  deuterocanonical 
books.  In  his  Apparatus  Biblicus,  after  setting  forth  the 
opinions  of  Rufinus  and  Jerome,  he  concludes :  ''Therefore 
the  books  which  are  in  the  second  Canon,  though  joined  to 
those  of  the  first  Canon,  are  not  of  the  same  authority.''  He 
evidently  accords  to  these  books  canonicity,  but  believes 
that  the  degree  of  inspiration  is  not  so  intense  in  them. 
Loisy  (Histoire  du  Canon  de  I'Ancien  Testament,  pag.  235) 
favors  this  opinion,  and  cites  Ubaldi  in  support  of  it.f     But 

♦Dissert,  prelim,  ou  Proleg.  sur la  Bible,  i.  52,  53. 


fVerum  in  specie  et  in  concreto  nihil  vetat  quominus  in  quibusdam 
locis  intensiorem  veluti  gradum  inspirationis  admittamus,  atque  ita  diver- 
sos  modus  inspirationis  distinguamus.  Imo  hoc  omnino  faciendum  vide- 
tur:  siquidem  diversa  rerum  natura,  et  diversa  Scriptoris  conditio  hoc 
requirere  videtur.  Itaque,  ut  aliquid  magis  in  specie  dicamus,  dis- 
tinguere  possumus  loca  Scripturas  prophetica,  vioraUa  et  historica,  et  in  his 
nirsus  substantiam  historias  a  minutis  quibusdam  adiunctis.  Ad  loca 
prophetica  quod  attinet,  duo  casus  distinguendi  sunt :  vel  enim  vaticinium 


DECREE    OF   THE    COUNCIL   OF    TRENT  527 

it  is  plainly  evident  that  Ubaldi  there  means  to  distinguish 
between  revelation,  designated  by  him  as  the  more  intense 
mode  of  inspiration,  and  inspiration  proper,  which  permitted 
the  acquisition  of  knowledge  by  natural  means.  There  is 
nothing  in  Ubaldi  in  support  of  this  vainly  imagined  distinc- 
tion of  degrees  of  canonicity. 

A  greater  departure  from  the  decree  of  the  Council  of 
Trent  was  made  by  Jahn  (ti8i6)  who  declares:  'That  by 
the  testimony  of  the  Fathers  of  Trent,  the  difference  between 
protocanonical  and  deuterocanonical  books  has  by  no  means 
been  removed,  and  the  Fathers  well  understood  that  it  could 
not  be  removed,  no  more  than  the  fact  upon  which  it  stood, 
namely:  that  the  deuterocanonical  books  had  not  been 
received  everywhere,  and  by  all  in  past  times."  [Einleitung 
in  Die  Gottlichen  Biicher  des  Alten  Bundes.    (2  edit.)  I.  140.] 

There  is  evidence  of  exceeding  shortsightedness  here. 
The  Fathers  did  not  change  the  external  facts  concerning  the 
Scriptures.  They  could  not  change  the  past.  They  did  not 
reverse  the  opinion  of  Jerome ;  they  did  not  declare  that  the 
deuterocanonical  books  had  never  been  doubted,  neither  did 
they  declare  that  the  doctrinal  import  of  these  books  was 
equal  to  that  of  the  first  Canon.  But  they  did  declare  that 
they  were  all  sacred  and  canonical  having  God  for  their 
author.  By  this  definition  they  added  nothing  intrinsically 
to  the  books;  but  they  infallibly  declared  that,  in  virtue  of 
their  inspired  character,  they  always  had  a  right  to  canon- 
icity, which  they  now  officially  recognized ;  and  they  right- 

a  propheta  antea  editum  fuit,  et  postea  scripto  consignatum,  ut  sunt 
pleraque  vaticinia  S.  Scripturse,  vel  in  ipso  scribendi  actu  vaticinium  edi- 
tum est:  in  primo  casu  sufficit  communis  et  ordinaria  inspiratio  ut  Scrip- 
tura  prophetica  etiam  formaliter,  seu  quatenus  scripta  est,  divina  et  inspir- 
ata  dici  possit ;  in  altero  vero  casu  non  solum  inspiratio,  sed  vere  ac  propria 
dicta  revelatio  necessaria  fuit,  cum  futurorum  cognitio  nonnisi  ex  divina 
revelatione  haberi  possit.  Talia  sunt  quasdam  leremiee  vaticinia,  ut 
colligi  videtur  ex  Jer.  XXXVI,  17,  18,  ubi  leremias  dicitur  dictasse  Baruch 
tamquam  amanuensi  suas  prophetias.  Quod  pertinet  ad  partes  didacticas 
et  historicas,  generatim  loquendo  non  amplius  quam  communis  inspira- 
tionis  ratio  requirebatur :  siquidem  tum  moralis  doctrina,  tum  historia 
Agiographis  nota  erat  sive  ex  naturali  lumine  cum  revelatione  coniuncto^ 
ut  in  Libris  Sapientialibus,  sive  ex  audita  pr^dicatione,  ut  in  Evangeliis 
et  Epistolis  Apostolorum,  sive  ex  scriptis  documentis,  vel  etiam  ex  propria 
experientia,  ut  generatim  fiebat  in  scriptoribus  sacras  historise  utriusque 
Testamenti."     Ubaldi  II.  11 1. 


528  DECREE    OF    THE    COUNCIL   OF    TRENT 

fully  based  their  action  on  the  mighty  preponderance  of  the 
tradition  of  all  times. 

The  opinions  of  Jahn  have  always  been  characterized  by 
error  .*    Itisnottobe  expected  that  one  with  such  pronounced 
rationalistic  views  would  accept  the  decree  of  the  Council  of 
Trent. 

The  decree  of  Trent  formed  a  new  starting  point  for  Cath- 
olic opinion.  No  longer  did  one  question  whether  or  not 
certain  Fathers  held  these  books,  but,  accepting  the  definition 
of  the  Church,  they  interpreted  it  to  have  extended  divine' 
inspiration  to  all  the  books  of  the  Catholic  Canon,  and  the 
Council  of  Vatican  has  ratified  this  consensus  of  Catholic 
opinion  by  defining:  "If  anyone  shall  not  receive  all  the 
books  with  all  their  parts,  as  the  Tridentine  Synod  enumer- 
ates them,  as  sacred  and  canonical ;  or  shall  deny  that  they 
are  divinely  inspired,  let  him  be  anathema."! 

Protestant  opinion  has  been  consistent  in  nothing  since 
its  beginning ;  it  has  varied  much  regarding  the  Canon.  The 
Gallican  Confession  of  1559,  the  Anglican  Confession  of  1562, 
the  Confession  of  Geneva  of  1564,  declare  that  the  apocrypha 
(deuterocanonical  books)  are  useful  for  pious  reading,  but 
not  available  to  prove  doctrine.  The  conciliabulum  of  West- 
minster, in  1648  declared:  'That  the  so-called  apocryphal 
books,  being  not  divinely  inspired,  by  no  means  belong  to  the 
Canon,  wherefore  they  have  no  authority  in  the  Church  of 
God  ( ?),  and  are  to  be  treated  as  merely  human  writings." 

The  Biblical  Society  of  London,  declared  in  1826,  that  no 
edition  of  Scripture  was  to  be  circulated  which  contained  the 
apocrypha,  and  no  aid  was  to  be  given  to  anyone  circulating 
such  edition.  What  they  hold  to-day  on  the  Canon,  it  is 
hard  to  say. 

*Jahn  was  bom  in  Moravia  in  1750.  He  devoted  his  early  years  to  the 
study  of  Oriental  languages  and  the  Scriptures.  In  1789  he  held  the  chair 
of  Oriental  languages,  Introduction  to  the  Old  Testament,  and  Archaeology 
in  the  University  of  Vienna.  In  18 13,  he  was  also  made  professor  of  dogma 
in  the  same  university.  He  was  a  man  of  much  erudition,  but  thoroughly 
infected  with  rationalism.  His  greatest  work  is  his  Introduction  to  the 
Old  Testament.  This  was  prohibited  by  the  Congregation  of  the  Index 
in  1822.  Several  other  of  his  works  have  also  been  prohibited  He  died 
in  1816. 


+Constit   dogmat.  de  fide  Cath.  Can.  4,  De  Revel. 


The    New  Testament 


Chapter  XII. 
The  Canon  of  the  New  Testament. 

The  formation  and  preservation  of  the  Canon  of  the  New 
Testament  is  certainly  due  to  the  direct  influence  of  divine 
Providence  moving  second  agents  to  execute  the  will  of  God. 
Still  it  was  not  the  primary  design  of  Christ  to  deliver  to  the 
world  a  written  code  of  his  doctrines.  He  inaugurated  the 
great  work  of  the  Kingdom  of  God  by  oral  preaching.  He 
wrote  nothing ;  neither  did  He  impose  any  precept  on  those 
whom  He  had  chosen  to  write.  He  bade  them  preach.  He 
redeemed  the  world  from  sin;  taught  it  his  Gospel  by 
word  of  mouth,  and  founded  a  living,  teaching  agency  to 
carry  on  His  work  forever.  These  were  principal.  Out  of 
these  came  the  divine  Scriptures  in  the  designs  of  Providence ; 
not  to  supersede  Christ's  way  of  teaching  the  world,  but  to  be 
a  means,  a  deposit,  whence  the  Church  should  draw,  and  give 
to  the  people. 

In  fact,  all  the  terms  which  Christ  used  in  enunciating  his 
design  of  teaching  the  world,  demonstrate  that  the  principal 
and  ordinary  means  of  teaching  mankind  was  ever  to  be  the 
living  word  by  preaching.  No  other  means  would  be  ade- 
quate to  accomplish  that  which  Christ  willed.  The  world  of 
that  day  could  not  be  reached  through  the  medium  of  letters. 
Since  the  invention  of  printing,  and  the  general  diffusion  of 
literature,  ideas  may  be  rapidly  spread  by  the  press ;  but  the 
message  of  Christ  was  given  to  man  before  such  means 
existed  for  the  communication  of  thought.  Moreover,  the 
message  of  Christ  was  for  the  poor  and  the  illiterate,  as  well 
as  for  the  savant ;  for  busy  toilers  who  had  not  time  nor  philo- 

(529) 

34  (H.s.) 


530  THE    CANON   OF    THE    NEW    TESTAMENT 

sophical  depth  to  draw  the  Message  from  the  written  instru- 
ment, and  Christ  estabHshed  the  only  means  capable  of  teach- 
ing all  nations — the  magisterium  of  the  Church.  The  children 
of  men  were  lambs  who  had  need  to  be  fed,  and  Christ  gave 
them  an  eternal  succession  of  shepherds. 

The  Apostles  adopted  the  method  of  their  Master.  '  'Aided 
by  the  illumination  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  relying  on  the 
sole  power  of  Christ,  which  wrought  many  miracles  by  them, 
they  announced  the  Kingdom  of  Heaven  throughout  the 
world ;  neither  did  they  take  thought  to  write  books,  for  they 
fulfilled  a  far  greater  and  sublimer  office.  Paul,  who  is  pre- 
eminent among  all  the  Apostles  in  richness  of  diction  and 
depth  of  thought,  wrote  nothing  except  a  few  epistles, 
although  he  could  have  expounded  man}^  mysteries.  .  .  .  And 
the  other  co-laborers  of  the  Lord,  the  twelve  Apostles,  the 
seventy  disciples,  and  many  others,  were  by  no  means  ignor- 
ant (of  these  mysteries).  Nevertheless,  of  all  the  disciples 
of  the  Lord,  only  Matthew  and  John  left  us  a  written  word ; 
and  we  are  told  that  they  were  moved  to  w^rite  by  a  particular 
need."     (Euseb.  Hist.  Eccles.  IIL  24.) 

"What,"  says  Irenaeus,  "if  the  Apostles  had  not  left  us 
the  Scriptures?  Would  it  not  be  necessary  to  follow  the 
traditions  of  those  to  whom  they  committed  the  Churches  ? 
Verily  this  method  many  barbarous  nations  adopt,  who 
believe  in  Christ  without  ink  and  paper,  having  the  law  of 
salvation  written  in  their  hearts  by  the  Spirit,  and  faith- 
fully holding  to  the  old  tradition,  believing  in  one  God,  etc." 
(Irenaeus,  Migne  7,  855.)  Again:  "The  tradition  of  the 
Apostles,  manifested  in  the  whole  world,  may  be  learned  in 
every  Church  by  those  who  wish  to  know  the  truth,  and  we 
can  enumerate  the  bishops  constituted  by  the  Apostles  and 
their  successors  even  to  our  day."     (Irenaeus,  Migne,  7,  848.) 

Wherefore,  they  err  greatly  who  constitute  the  Scriptures 
the  sole  means  of  teaching  Christ's  message;  for  many 
churches  were  flourishing  before  any  of  the  N.  T.  existed. 
The  dates  of  the  Gospels  can  not  be  fixed  with  precision.  For 
the  Gospel  of  Matthew,  Catholic  opinion  ranges  over  the 
period  included  between  the  years  36  and  67  of  the  Christian 
era ;  the  period  for  ]\Iark  is  from  the  year  40  to  the  year  70 ; 


THE    CANON    OF   THE    NEW    TESTAMENT  531 

Luke's  Gospel  is  variously  placed  from  the  year  47  to  the 
year  63,  while  the  Gospel  of  St.  John  is  assigned  to  the  closing 
years  of  the  first  Christian  century.  Many  concur  in  the 
opinion  which  places  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  in  the  year  64 
of  our  era. 

The  dates  of  some  of  the  Epistles  of  Paul  may  be  assigned 
with  a  good  degree  of  certitude.  The  Epistles  to  the  Thes- 
salonians  were  written  about  the  year  53 ;  the  first  Epistle  to 
the  Corinthians,  in  the  first  months  of  the  year  57 ;  the  second 
Epistle,  in  the  autumn  of  the  same  year.  The  Epistle  to  the 
Romans  was  written  toward  the  close  of  the  year  5  7  or  in  the 
beginning  of  58 ;  the  Epistle  to  the  Galatians  preceded  that  to 
the  Romans,  and  ranges  between  the  year  55  and  57.  The 
Epistle  of  St.  Paul  to  the  Ephesians,  the  Epistle  to  the  Colos- 
sians,  and  the  Epistle  to  Philemon  are  by  Loisy  placed  during 
the  captivity  of  Paul,  from  the  year  61  to  64.  It  is  more 
difficult  to  assign  the  proper  date  of  the  Epistles  to  Timothy, 
Titus,  and  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews.  Modem  exegetes  are 
of  accord  in  placing  them  at  a  later  date  than  the  preceding. 
The  Epistle  of  St.  James  is  later  than  the  Epistle  to  the 
Romans,  and  internal  evidence  is  therein  that  St.  James  was 
conversant  with  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans.  Its  probable 
date  might  be  placed  about  the  year  60.  The  Epistles  of 
St.  Peter  are  ascribed  to  the  last  years  of  his  life.  According 
to  Eusebius  and  Jerome,  the  prince  of  the  Apostles  was 
martyred  in  the  third  year  of  Nero's  reign,  about  the  year  67. 
The  Epistle  of  vSt.  Jude  has  a  close  affinity  with  the  second 
Epistle  of  St.  Peter,  but  whether  Peter  drew  from  Jude,  or 
Jude  from  Peter  is  not  clear.  They  who  defend  the  first 
hypothesis  assign  the  year  65  as  the  date  of  St.  Jude's  Epistle ; 
while  the  advocates  of  the  second  hypothesis  assign  a  later 
date.  The  first  Epistle  of  St.  John  may  be  considered  as  a 
sort  of  preface  to  his  Gospels,  and  written  at  the  same  time ; 
the  second  and  third  Epistles  are  of  a  little  later  date.  The 
Apocalypse  according  to  the  most  ancient  testimonies,  and 
particularly  that  of  St.  Irenaeus,  was  written  toward  the 
close  of  the  reign  of  Domitian,  about  the  year  95. 

Though  these  are  approximate  dates,  they  are  precise 
enough  to  establish  the  fact  that' several  years  of  intense 


532  THE    CANON    OF    THE    NEW   TESTAMENT 

Apostolic  work  had  elapsed  before  the  first  writing  appeared. 
And  in  that  period  churches  had  been  founded  in  Palestine, 
and  other  parts  of  the  Eastern  world,  and  probably  also  at 
Rome.  The  Church  and  the  apostolic  priesthood  was  princi- 
pal ;  the  Scriptures  were  a  means  which  the  Church  was  to 
use.  But  as  God  wished  to  provide  adequately  for  the  propa- 
gation and  preservation  of  the  Gospel  of  the  Kingdom  of 
Heaven,  he  also  brought  it  about  that  there  should  be  pre- 
served in  writing  some  of  the  most  important  truths  of  the 
New  Dispensation.  The  spirit  of  truth  who  was  sent  to  sug- 
gest all  things  necessary  in  the  new  economy,  moved  the 
holy  men  to  commit  certain  things  to  writing.  But  these 
writings  owe  their  origin  to  special  occasions,  and  particular 
circumstances.  Primarily  they  were  intended  for  some  one 
or  few  individuals  or  churches.  Gradually  they  became 
interchanged  and  disseminated  among  the  churches,  and 
it  is  only  in  the  third  century  that  we  find  any  church  having 
a  complete  list  of  the  Holy  Books  of  the  New  Law. 

We  place,  therefore,  as  a  leading  proposition,  that  the 
writers  of  the  New  Law  wrote  with  no  design  to  compile  a 
code  of  Scripture.  They  wrote  to  supply  some  particular 
need  that  which  they  knew  to  be  the  Word  of  God ;  the  future 
destiny  of  their  writings  to  form  a  sacred  deposit  was  hidden 
from  them.  The  mode  of  the  formation  of  the  body  of  Scrip- 
tures of  the  New  Law  was  by  gradual  accession.  Documents 
written  to  some  individual  person  or  Church  were  copied  and 
sent  to  others.  Paul  recognizes  and  makes  use  of  this  method 
in  his  Epistle  to  the  Colossians:  **And  when  this  Epistle  is 
read  among  you,  cause  that  it  be  read  also  in  the  Church  of 
the  Laodiceans ;  and  that  ye  likewise  read  the  Epistle  from 
Laodicea."     [Coloss.  IV.  i6.] 

That  it  was  likewise  characteristic  of  the  early  Christians 
to  carefully  preserve  writings  of  doctrinal  import  may  be 
inferred  from  a  passage  in  the  writings  of  St.  Polycarp. 
"The  Epistles,"  he  says,  "of  Ignatius  (Martyr),  which  were 
sent  us  by  hira,  and  others,  as  many  as  we  had,  we  have  sent 
to  you,  as  you  requested ;  they  accompany  this  letter,  and 
from  them  you  will  receive  much  profit."  (S.  Polycarp,  ad 
Phil.  13.)     If  such  diligence  and  care  were  bestowed  on  the 


THE    CANON    OF    THE    NEW   TESTAMENT  533 

Epistles  of  Ignatius  Martyr,  much  more  would  be  bestowed 
on  t'he  writings  of  the  Apostles  and  Founders  of  Christianity. 
We  see  also  in  the  testimony  an  evidence  of  the  method  of 
communicating  writings  among  the  churches.  Both  agen- 
cies combined  brought  it  about  that  the  several  churches 
soon  had  their  sacred  deposit  of  the  New  Law ;  though  many 
years  elapsed  before  we  find  the  list  complete  in  any  church ; 
and  many  more,  before  all  the  churches  had  the  complete 
Canon. 

Even  in  the  writings  of  the  authors  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment, we  find  allusions  to  certain  collections  of  the  Scriptures 
of  the  New  Law.  In  his  second  Epistle,  Peter  speaks  of  the 
Epistles  of  Paul  as  of  writings  generally  known  to  the  Chris- 
tians :  '  'Wherefore,  dearly  beloved,  waiting  for  these  things, 
be  diligent  ...  as  also  our  most  dear  brother  Paul,  according 
to  the  wisdom  given  to  him,  hath  written,  as  also  in  all  his 
Epistles,  speaking  in  them  of  these  things ;  in  which  are  some 
things  hard  to  be  understood,  which  the  unlearned  and  the 
unstable,  wrest,  as  also  the  other  Scriptures,  to  their  own  per- 
dition."    (II.  Peter  III.  14-16.) 

"In  this  place,"  says  Estius,  "Peter  canonizes,  so  to 
speak,  Paul's  Epistles.  For  in  saying  'as  also  the  other 
Scriptures,'  he,  in  truth,  declares  that  he  placed  them  among 
the  Holy  Scriptures." 

Comely  adduces  a  proof  from  the  First  Epistle  to  Tim- 
othy to  prove  that  Paul  was  conversant  with  the  Gospel  of 
Luke.  Paul  speaks  thus:  "For  the  Scripture  saith,  'Thou 
shalt  not  muzzle  the  ox  that  treadeth  out  the  com';  and, 
'The  laborer  is  worthy  of  his  hire.'  "  (I.  Tim.  V.  18).  The 
first  sentence  of  Paul's  quotation  is  taken  from  Deuteronomy 
XXV.  4.  From  the  context,  it  is  plainly  evident  to  him 
who  reads  that  the  second  sentence  is  also  adduced  as  Holy 
Scripture.  The  passage  exists  in  Luke  X.  7,  and  the  illation 
is  just  that  Paul  quotes  here  as  divine  Scripture  a  passage  of 
the  Third  Gospel.  Hence  we  infer  that,  at  the  writing  of  the 
Epistle  to  Timothy,  Luke's  written  Gospel  existed,  and  was 
known  to  the  Christians  as  Holy  Scripture. 

Up  to  our  times,  the  universal  belief  of  Christians  held 
that  the  disciples  and  first  successors  of  the  Apostles  placed 


534        THE  CANON  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT 

the  works  of  the  authors  of  the  New  Testament  with  the 
books  of  the  Old  Testament,  as  of  equal  divinity  and  author- 
ity. The  rationalistic  plague  which  infected  the  world  in 
our  times,  first  essayed  to  overthrow  this  universally 
accepted  truth,  claiming  that  the  writings  of  the  Apostles  are 
never  quoted  in  the  solemn  formulas  used  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, and  that  the  words  of  the  Lord  are  quoted  from  oral 
traditions. 

To  meet  this  opposition,  we  must  first  set  forth  some  of 
the  characteristics  of  those  early  times. 

It  is  true  that  oral  communication  prevailed  in  those 
times.     Not  every  one  could  have  a  manuscript  of  the  writ- 
ten word,  but  all  heard  the  voice  of  those  **who  preached 
peace."     The  intense  activity  of  the  first  teachers  of  the 
New  Law  made  Christ  and  his  Law  a  living  reality  in  every 
land.     The  Gospel  was  not  so  much  a  written  reality  as  a  liv- 
ing reality.     The  events  had  taken  place  in  no  remote  age ; 
the  first  Christians  received  their  doctrine  from  those  who 
announced  that  "which  they   had  heard,  which  they  had 
seen  with  their  eyes — which  they  had  looked  upon,  and  their 
hands  had  handled."     Therefore,  it  is  not  to  be  expected  to 
find  numerous  explicit  quotations  from  the  written  deposit 
in  those  early  days.     The  early  teachers  preached  much,  and 
wrote  little.     Much  of  what  they  wrote  has  succumbed  to  the 
ravages  of  time.     They  used  the  Gospel  of  Christ,  not  so 
much  as  a  written  deposit,  but  as  a  present  living  reality, 
and  part  of  the  life  of  the  people.     Men  of  those  days  received 
the  doctrine  of  Christ  not  from  books,  but  by  the  living  word 
of  preaching ;  they  handed  it  down  to  others  in  the  same  man- 
ner in  which  they  had  received  it.     But  yet  there  is  evidence 
that  when  one  of  the  Books  of  the  New^  Testament  did  come 
into  existence,  it  w^as  recognized  as  the  word  of  God.     Those 
who  received  it  did  not  make  an  analysis  of  the  concept  of 
inspiration  to  canonize  it.     It  came  from  the  men  who  had 
brought  them  the  message  of  peace ;  it  embodied  what  they 
had  received  from  those  who  preached  Christ  to  them,  and 
this  was  its  perfect  warrant.     Thus  the  Books  of  the  New 
Law  first  came  into  the  churches  as  individual  instruments ; 
then  as  groups;  and,  lastly,  a  com.plete  list  w^as  formed  by 
communication  between  the  churches. 


the  canon  of  the  new  testament  535 

Hence,  in  the  age  immediately  succeeding  the  Apos- 
tles, WE  find  several  of  the  books  of  our  Canon  recog- 
nized AS  DIVINE  Scripture. 

In  the  Epistle  vulgarly  attributed  to  St.  Barnabas,  we 
find  a  quotation  from  St.  Matthew  in  the  solemn  formula 
"sicut  scriptum  est^"  («?  yey pairTai).'^ 

In  the  final  sentence  of  the  IV.  Chapter  of  this  Epistle  is 
as  follows :  ''Let  us  pay  heed  lest  we  be  found  as  it  is  writ- 
ten: 'Many  called,  few  chosen.'  "  Now,  the  only  place 
where  it  is  thus  written  is  the  Gospel  of  Matthew  XX.  i6. ; 
XXII.  14. 

Some  of  the  older  rationalists  considered  this  quotation 
as  an  interpolation  of  the  Latin  interpreter.  After  the 
Codex  Sinaiticus  had  overthrown  this  hypothesis,  Volkman, 
Renan  and  Strauss,  advanced  the  opinion  that  the  quotation 
came  from  IV.  Ezra,  VIII.  3:  "Multi  quidem  creati  sunt; 
pauci  autem  salvabuntur."  But  a  comparison  of  the  two 
texts  clearly  evinces  Matthew  as  the  authority.  Wherefore, 
Mangold  attempted  to  destroy  the  force  of  the  quotation  by 
showing  that  the  pseudo  Barnabas  quotes  Henoch  in  the 
formula:     "As  it  is  written."     But  this  would  not  prove 

♦The  Epistle  of  Barnabas  was  first  published  in  Paris  in  Greek,  and 
Latin  by  Menard  and  d'Achery  1645  but  not  complete.  The  entire 
Greek  text  was  first  found  by  Tischendorf  in  his  famous  Codex  Sinaiticus 
in  1859.  The  contents  of  the  letter  show  plainly  that  it  is  not  the  work 
of  the  companion  of  Paul,  Before  his  conversion,  the  author  of  the  letter 
was  a  pagan,  for  he  declares,  XVI.  7,  that  "before  believing  in  God, 
his  heart  was  full  of  idolatry. "  Barnabas  was  a  Jew,  and  worshipped  the 
true  God.  Again,  the  author  is  not  conversant  with  Jewish  rites,  and 
obligations.  Moreover,  the  letter  speaks  of  the  pimishment  of  the  Jews 
in  the  destruction  of  their  Temple;  whereas,  critics  conclude  that  Barnabas 
did  not  live  to  see  the  taking  of  Jerusalem  by  Titus.  But  the  value  of  the 
letter  is  considerable,  even  though  not  the  writing  of  Barnabas. 
There  is  in  it  elevation  of  ideas,  and  logical  presentation  of  truth.  Who- 
ever be  the  author,  he  touches  the  apostolic  age,  and  cannot  be  placed 
later  than  the  first  years  of  the  second  century.  The  work  is  marred  by 
excessive  allegory,  which  makes  the  writer  forget  that  Greek  is  not  the 
tongue  of  Abraham.  He  sees  a  prophecy  of  the  crucifixion  of  Jesus  Christ 
in  the  number  of  Abraham's  servants  who  were  318  (Gen.  XIV.  14).  The 
numerical  value  of  I  (Greek)  is  10 ;  of  H,  8 ;  and  T,  300.  IH  signifies  Jesus, 
and  T  (by  its  form,)  his  cross.  Therefore,  that  Abraham  took  318  men 
with  him  in  pursuit  of  Chedorlahomer,  was  prophetic  that  Jesus  Christ 
was  to  be  crucified! 


536 


THE    CANON    OF    THE  NEW   TESTAMENT 


that  he  did  not  consider  Matthew  divine  Scripture  but  that 
he  also  placed  Henoch  among  the  Holy  Books.  We  admire 
the  honesty  of  Hilgenfeld,  who  concedes  that  the  author 
quotes  Matthew,  and  also  that  the  Epistle  is  of  the  year  97. 
St.  Poly  carp,  in  his  Epistle  to  the  Philippians,  Chapter 
XII.,  has  this  testimony:  "As  it  is  written  in  these  Scrip- 
tures: *Be  angry  and  sin  not,'  and:  'Let  not  the  sun  go 
down  on  your  wrath.'  "  It  is  evident  that  Polycarp  here 
unites  two  passages  of  written  Scripture.  The  second  passage 
is  from  the  Epistle  of  Paul  to  the  Ephesians,  IV.  26.  As  the 
proving  force  of  this  passage  is  cogent,  the  rationalists  try  to 
weaken  it  by  denying  its  authenticity.  But  its  authentic 
valor  is  sufficient  to  satisfy  all  just  criticism.  This  short 
Epistle  of  Polycarp  to  the  Philippians,  contains  according  to 
Funk  (op.  cit.)  sixty-eight  allusions  to  the  New  Testament. 
The  verbal  parallelism  is  so  exact,  that  it  is  evident  that  they 
were  drawn  from  the  written  deposit.  We  here  exhibit 
some  of  the  clearest  ones : 

St.  Polycarp.  Epist.  ad 
Philip  I. 

" —  quern  resuscitavit  Deus, 
solutis  doloribus  infemi.  In 
quern  non  videntes  creditis, 
credentes  autem  exultatis  lae- 
titia  inenarrabili  et  glorificata." 


Act.  II.  24. 

" —  quern  Deus  suscitavit, 
solutis  doloribus  infemi,  juxta 
quod  impossible  erat  teneri 
ilium  ab  eo." 

I.  Pet.  I.  8. 

" —  quern  cum  non  videtis. 
diligitis:  in  quem  nunc  quoque 
non  videntes  creditis ;  credentes 
autem  exultabitis  laetitia  ine- 
narrabili et  glorificata — ." 

Epist.  II.  8,  9. 

"Gratia  enim  estis  salvati 
per  fidem,  et  hoc  non  ex  vobis: 
Dei  enim  donum  est,  non  ex 
operibus,  ut  ne  quis  glorietur." 

I.  Pet.  I.  13. 

"Propter  quod  succincti  lum- 
bos  mentis  vestrae,  sobrii  per- 
fecte  sperate  in  cam,   quae  of- 


Ibid. 

" —  scientes,  quod 
estis  salvati,  non  ex 
bus—." 


gratia 
operi- 


Ibid.  II. 

"Propter  quod  succincti  lum- 
bos  vestros  servite  Deo  in 
timore — . ' ' 


THE    CANON    OF    N.    T.    OF   POLYCARP 


537 


fertur  vobis,  gratiam,  in  revela- 
tionem  Jesus  Christi — " 

I.  Cor.  VI.  14. 

"Deus  vero  et  Dominum  sus- 
citavit,  et  nos  suscitabit  per 
virtutem  suam." 

I.  Pet.  III.  9. 

" — non  reddentes  malum  pro 
malo,  nee  maledictum  pro  mal- 
edicto." 

Math.  VII.  I,  2. 

"Nolite  judicare,  ut  non  ju- 
dicemini.  In  quo  enim  judicio 
judicaveritis,  judicabimini:  et 
in  qua  mensura  mensi  fueritis, 
remetietur  vobis." 

Luke  VI.  36-38. 

Estote  ergo  misericordes,  si- 
cut  et  Pater  vester  misericors 
est.  Nolite  judicare,  et  non  ju- 
dicabimini: nolite  condemnare, 
et  non  condemnabimini.  Di- 
mittite,  et  dimittemini.  Date, 
et  dabitur  vobis:  mensuram 
bonam  et  confertam,  et  coagit- 
atam  et  supereffluentem  da- 
bunt  in  sinum  vestrum.  Ea- 
dem  quippe  mensura,  qua 
mensi  fueritis,  remetietur  vo- 
bis." 

Math.  V.  3. 

"Beati  pauperes  spiritu,  quo- 
niam  ipsorum  est  regnum  coelo- 
rum." 

Ibid.  10. 

Beati,  qui  persecutionem  pa- 
tiuntur  propter  justitiam,  quo- 
niam  ipsorum  est  regnum  coelo- 
rum." 


Ibid. 

"Is  vero,  qui  ipsum  suscita- 
vit  e  mortuis,  et  nos  suscita- 
bit—." 

Ibid. 

" —  non  reddentes  malum 
pro  malo,  nee  maledictum  pro 
maledicto — ." 

Ibid. 

" —  memores  autem  eorum, 
quae  dixit  Dominus  docens: 
'Nolite  judicare,  ne  judicemini; 
dimittite,  et  dimittetur  vobis; 
miseremini,  ut  misericordiam 
consequamini ;  qua  mensura 
mensi  fueritis,  remetietur  vo- 
bis'; et:  'Beati  pauperes,  et  qui 
persecutionem  patiuntur,  quo- 
niam  ipsorum  est  regnum  Dei.' " 


538 


THE    CANON   OF   N.    T.    OF   POLYCARP 


Gal.  IV.  26. 

"Ilia  autem,  quae  sursum  est 
Jerusalem,  libera  est,  quae  est 
mater  nostra." 


I.  Tim.  VI.  10. 
"Radix  enim  omnium  malo- 
rum  est  cupiditas. 

Ibid.  7. 

"Nihil  enim  intulimus  in 
hunc  mundum:  baud  dubium, 
quod  nee  auferre  quid  possu- 
mus." 

Gal.  VI.  7. 

"Nolite  errare:  Deus  non  irri- 
detur. ' ' 

I.  Pet.  II.  II. 

" —  carissimi,  obsecro  vos 
tamquam  advenas  et  peregri- 
nos  abstinere  vos  a  camalibus 
desideriis,  quae  militant  ad- 
versus  animam — ." 

Rom.  XIV.  10,  12. 

"Tu  autem,  quid  judicas  fra- 
trem  tuum?  aut  tu,  quare  sper- 
nis  f ratrem  tuum  ?  Omnes  enim 
stabimus  ante  tribunal  Christi. 
Itaque  unusquisque  nostrum 
pro  se  rationem  reddet  Deo." 


Ibid.  III. 

"Neque  enim 
alius  mei  similis  beati  et  glori- 
osi  Pauli  sapientiam  asseqm 
potest ;  qui  cum  esset  apud  vos, 
coram  hominibus  tunc  viventi- 
bus  perfecte  ac  firmiter  verbum 
veritatis  docuit;  qui  et  absens 
vobis  scripsit  epistolas,  in  quas 
si  intueamini,  aedificari  poteritis 
in  fide,  quae  vobis  est  data, 
quasque  est  mater  omnium  nos- 
trum—." 

Ibid'.  IV. 

"Principium  autem  omnium 
malorum  est  habendi  cupidi- 
tas." 

Ibid. 

"Scientes  ergo,  quod  nihil  in- 
tulimus in  hunc  mundum,  sed 
nee  auferre  quid  valemus — ." 

Ibid.  V. 

"Scientes  ergo,  quod  Deus 
non  irridetur — ." 

Ibid. 

" — quia  omnis  cupiditas  mil- 
itat  adversus  spiritum — ." 


Ibid.  VI. 

" —  omnes  ante  tribunal 
Christi  stare,  et  unumquemque 
pro  se  rationem  reddere  opor- 
tet." 


THE    CANON    OF    N.    T.    OF    CLEMENT   OF    ROME 


539 


I.  Jo.  IV.  3. 

" —  et  omnis  spiritus,  qui  sol- 
vit Jesum,  ex  Deo  non  est;  et 
hie  est  Antichristus,  de  quo  au- 
distis,  quoniam  venit,  et  nunc 
jam  in  mundo  est. 

Math.  VI.  13. 

"Et  ne  nos  inducas  in  tenta- 
tionem,  sed  libera  nos  a  malo. 
Amen." 

Ibid.  XXVI.  41. 

"Vigilate,  et  orate,  ut  non  in- 
tretis  in  tentationem.  Spiritus 
quidem  promptus  est,  caro  au- 
tem  infirma." 

I.  Pet.  II.  22-24. 

" —  qui  peccatum  non  fecit, 
nee  inventus  est  dolus  in  ore 
ejus:  qui  peccata  nostra  ipse 
pertulit  in  corpore  suo  super 
lignum — . ' ' 

I.  Pet.  II.  12. 

" — conversationem  vestram 
inter  gentes  habentes  bo- 
nam. — " 


Ibid.  VII. 

"Omnis  enim  qui  non  con- 
fessus  fuerit  Jesum  Christum 
in  came  venisse,  Antichristus 
est—." 


Ibid. 

" — rogantes  omnium  con- 
spectorem  Deum,  ne  nos  indu- 
cat  in  tentationem,  sicut  dixit 
Dominus:  'Spiritus  quidem 
promptus  est,  caro  autem  in- 
firma.' " 


Ibid.  VIII. 

" —  qui  peccata  nostra  in 
corpore  suo  super  lignum  per- 
tulit, qui  peccatum  non  fecit, 
nee  inventus  est  dolus  in  ore 
ejus — ." 

Ibid.  X. 

"Omnes  vobis  invicem  sub- 
jecti  estote,  conversationem 
vestram  irreprehensibilem  hab- 
entes in  gentibus — ." 

Ibid.  XI. 

"An  nescimus,  quia  sancti 
mundum  judicabunt?  sicut 
Paulus  docet.  Ego  autem  nihil 
tale  sensi  in  vobis,  vel  audivi, 
in  quibus  laboravit  beatus  Pau- 
lus, qui  estis  in  principio  Epis- 
tolae  ejus." 

Among  the  genuine  works  of  St.  Clement  of  Rome  are 
two  Epistles  to  the  Corinthians,  and  two  on  Virginity.  The 
two  latter  were  assailed  by  some  rationalists,  but  they  have 


I.  Cor.  VI.  2. 

"An  nescitis,  quoniam  sancti 
de  hoc  mundo  judicabunt?  Et 
si  in  vobis  judicabitur  mundus, 
indigni  estis,  qui  de  minimis  ju- 
dicetis?" 


540 


THE  CANON  OF  N.  T.  OF  CLEMENT  OF  ROME 


been  defended  by  such  an  excellent  critic  as  Wet  stein.  The 
following  schema  exhibits  Clement's  use  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment. 


Luke  VI.  36—38. 

"Estote  ergo  misericordes, 
sicut  et  Pater  vaster  misericors 
est.  Nolite  judicare,  et  non  ju- 
dicabimini:  nolite  condemnare, 
et  non  condemnabimini.  Di- 
mittite,  et  dimittemini.  Date, 
et  dabitur  vobis:  mensuram 
bonam  et  confertam,  et  cogita- 
tam  et  supereffluentem  dabunt 
in  sinum  vestrum.  Eadem 
quippe  mensura,  qua  mensi 
fueritis,  remetietur  vobis. '  ' ' 

Math.  XXVI.  24. 

"Filius  quidem  hominis  va- 
dit,  sicut  scriptum  est  de  illo; 
vae  autem  homini  illi,  per  quern 
Filius  hominis  tradetur:  bon- 
um  erat  ei,  si  natus  non  fuisset 
homo  ille. ' ' 

Luke  XVII.  2. 

' '  Utilius  est  illi,  si  lapis  mola- 
ris  imponatur  circa  collum  ejus, 
et  projiciatur  in  mare,  quam  ut 
scandalizet  unum  de  pusilUs  is- 
tis. ' ' 


St.  Clementis  Epist.  I.  ad 
Corinthios,  XIII. 

"Sic  enim  dixit:  'Estote 
misericordes,  ut  misericordiam 
consequamini ;  dimittite,  ut  di- 
mittatur  vobis;  sicut  facitis,  ita 
vobis  fiet;  sicut  datis,  ita  da- 
bitur vobis;  sicut  judicatis,  ita 
judicabimini;  sicut  indulgetis, 
ita  vobis  indulgebitur ;  qua  men- 
sura metimini,  in  ea  mensura - 
bitur vobis.'  " 


Ibid.  XLVI. 

' '  Recordamini  verborum  Je- 
su  Domini  nostri.  Dixit  enim: 
'Vae  homini  ilH:  bonum  erat  ei, 
si  natus  non  fuisset,  quam  ut 
unum  ex  electis  meis  scandaH- 
zaret:  meHus  erat,  ut  ei  mola 
circumponeretur,  et  in  mare 
demergeretur,  quam  ut  unum 
de  pusillis  meis  scandaliza- 
ret.'" 


I.  Paul,  I.  Cor.  12. 

"Hoc  autem  dico,  quod  un- 
usquisque  vestrum  dicit:  Ego 
quidem  sum  Pauli:  ego  autem 
Apollo:  ego  vero  Cephae:  ego 
autem  Christi. ' ' 


Ibid.  XLVII. 

"Sumite  Epistolam  beati 
Pauh  ApostoH.  Quid  primum 
vobis  in  principio  EvangeHi 
scripsit?  Profecto  in  Spiritu  ad 
vos  htteras  dedit  de  seipso  et 
Cepha  et  Apollo,  quia  etiam 
tum  diversa  in  studia  scissi  era- 
tis. ' ' 


THE  CANON  OF  N.  T.  OF  CLEMENT  OF  ROME 


541 


I.  Peter  IV.  8. 

"Ante  omnia  autem,  mutu- 
am  in  vobismetipsis  caritatem 
continuam  habentes,  quia  cari- 
tas  operit  multitudinem  pecca- 
torum. ' ' 

Math.  IX.  13. 

"Euntes  autem  disci te,  quid 
est:  Misericordiam  volo,  et  non 
sacrificium.  Non  enim  veni 
vocare  justos,  sed  peccatores. ' ' 

Ibid.  X.  32. 

"Omnis  ergo,  qui  confitebi- 
tur  me  coram  hominibus,  con- 
fitebor  et  ego  eum  coram  Patre 
meo,  qui  in  ccelis  est — . ' ' 

Ibid.  VII.  21. 

"Non  omnis,  qui  dicit  mihi: 
Domine,  Domine,  intrabit  in 
regnum  coelorum,  sed  qui  facit 
voluntatem  Patris  mei,  qui  in 
coelis  est,  ipse  intrabit  in  reg- 
num coelorum. ' ' 

Ibid.  VII.  23. 

"Et  tunc  confitebor  illis: 
Quia  nunquam  novi  vos:  disce- 
dite  a  me,  qui  operamini  iniqui- 
tatem. ' ' 


MathX.  28. 

"Et  nolite  timere  eos,  qui 
occidunt  corpus,  animam  au- 
tem non  possunt  occidere,  sed 


Ibid.  XLIX. 

"Charitas  nos  Deo  agglu- 
tinat:  charitas  operit  inultitu- 
dinem  peccatorum :  charitas 
omnia  sustinet — . ' ' 

St.  Clementis  Epist.  II.  ad 
Corinthios,  II. 

'  *  Aha  quoque  Scriptura  dicit 
*Non  veni  vocare  justos,  sed 
peccatores — . ' ' 

Ibid.  III. 

"Ait  vero  etiam  ipse:  'Qui 
me  confessus  fuerit  in  conspec- 
tu  hominum,  confitebor  ipsum 
in  conspectu  Patris  mei.' 

Ibid.  IV. 

"Non  modo  igitur  ipsum  vo- 
cemus  Dominum ;  id  enim  non 
salvabit  nos;  siquidem  ait: 
'  Non  omnis  qui  dicit  mihi,  Do- 
mine, Domine,  salvabitur;  sed 
qui  facit  justitiam. '  ' ' 

Ibid. 

"Idcirco,  nobis  haec  facien- 
tibus,  dixit  Dominus:  'Si  fueri- 
tis  mecum  congregati  in  sinu 
meo,  et  non  feceritis  mandata 
mea,  abjiciam  vos,  et  dicam  vo- 
bis:  Discedite  a  me;  nescio  vos 
unde  sitis,  operarii  inquita- 
tis.'  "* 

Ibid.  V. 

"Ait  enim  Dominus:  'Eri- 
tis  velut  agni  in  medio  lupo- 
rum. '     Respondens  autem  Pe- 


*Clement  is  wont  to  unite  passages  from  the  several  Gospels  into  one 
quotation.  In  the  present  instance,  he  has  taken  the  first  part  of  the 
quotation  from  some  apocryphal  gospel. 


542 


THE  CANON  OF  N.  T.  OF  CLEMENT  OF  ROME 


potius  timete  eum,  qui  potest 
et  animam  et  corpus  perdere 
in  gehennam. ' ' 


Math.  VI.  24. 

"Nemo  potest  duobus  domi- 
nisservire: " 

Math.  XVI.  26. 

"Quid  enim  prodest  homi- 
ni,  si  mundum  universum  lucre- 
tur,  animae  vero  suae  detrimen- 
tum  patiatur  ?  Aut  quam  dabit 
homo  commutationem  pro  ani- 
ma  sua  ?  * ' 


This  passage  is  also  quoted 
by  Irenaeus,  Lib.  II.  64,  as  a 
saying  of  the  Lord.  Grabe  be- 
Heves  it  to  be  from  the  apoc- 
ryphal gospel  according  to  the 
Hebrews. 

Math.  XII.  50. 

Quicumque  enim  fecerit  vo- 
luntatem  Patris  mei,  qui  in  coe- 
lis  est,  ipse  meus  f rater  et  soror, 
et  mater  est. " 


trus  ei  dicit:  'Si  ergo  lupi  ag- 
nos  discerpserint  ? '  Dixit  Je- 
sus Petro:  *Ne  timeant  agni 
post  mortem  suam  lupos:  et  vos 
nolite  timere  eos  qui  occidunt 
vos,  et  nihil  vobis  possunt  fac- 
ere;  sed  timete  eum,  qui  post- 
quam  mortui  fueritis,  habet  po- 
testatem  animae  et  corporis,  ut 
mittat  in  gehennam  ignis, '  'f 

Ibid.  VI. 

*  Dicit  autem  Dominus:  Nul- 
lus  servus  potest  duobus  domi- 
nis  servire. ' ' 

Ibid. 

' '  Si  nos  volumus  et  Deo  ser- 
vire et  mammonae,  inutile  no- 
bis est.  Nam  'quae  utilitas,  si 
quis  universum  mundum  lu- 
cretur,  animam  autem  detri- 
mento  afficiat. '  ' ' 

Ibid.  VIII. 

"Ait  quippe  Dominus  in 
Evangelio:  'Si  parvum  non 
servastis,  quis  magnum  vobis 
dabit?  Dico  enim  vobis:  Qui 
fidelis  est  in  minimo,  et  in  ma- 
jori  fidelis  est. " 

Ibid.  IX. 

"Etenim  Dominus  dixit: 
'  Fratres  mei  sunt  ii  qui  f aciunt 
voluntatem  Patris  mei. '  ' ' 


fMost  of  the  passage  is  taken  from  some  apocryphal  gospel.  The  test 
of  time  and  judgment  of  the  Church  had  not  yet  divStinguished  between  the 
genuine  and  the  apocr3^phal  books  of  Holy  Scripture.  But  the  citation 
of  some  apocryphal  books  weakens  not  Clement's  testimony  to  prove 
that  the  books  of  our  Canon  existed  then  as  written  instruments,  though 
some  apocrypha  were  mingled  with  them. 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  N.  T.  OF  CLEMENT  OF  ROME   543 


Math.  V.  1 6. 

' '  Sic  luceat  lux  vestra  coram 
hominibus,  et  videant  opera 
vestra  bona,  et  glorificent  pa- 
trem  vestrum,  qui  in  coelis 
est." 

St.  Paul  ad  Ephes.  V.  6. 

'  *  Nemo  vos  seducat  inanibus 
verbis:  propter  haec  enim  venit 
ira  Dei  in  filios  diffidentiae. ' ' 


St.    Clementis   Epist.    I.    ad 
Virgines,  II. 

* '  — sicque  adimplentur  Chris- 
ti  verba:  'Videant  opera  ves- 
tra bona,  et  glorificent  Patrem 
vestrum  qui  in  coelis  est. '  ' ' 

Ibid.  III. 

"Itaque  nemo  vos  seducat 
inanibus  verbis — . ' ' 


II.  Tim.  III.  5. 

" — habentes  speciem  qui- 
dem  pietatis,  virtutem  autem 
ejus  abnegantes.  Et  hos  de- 
vita.  ' ' 


Ibid. 

" — de  talibus  enim  scrip tum 
est:  'Habentes  speciem  quidem 
pietatis,  virtutem  autem  ejus 
abnegantes.'  " 


I.  Cor.  VII.  34. 

*  *  Et  mulier  innupta  et  virgo 
cogitat,  quae  Domini  sunt,  ut 
sit  sancta  corpore  et  spiritu. 
Quae  autem  nupta  est  cogitat 
quae  sunt  mundi,  quomodo  pla- 
ceat  viro. ' ' 

Luke.  VII.  28. 

"Dico  enim  vobis:  Major  in- 
ter natos  mulierum  propheta 
Joanne  Baptista  nemo  est:  qui 
autem  minor  est  in  regno  Dei, 
major  est  illo. " 


Ibid.  V. 

*  *  Solicita  sit  necesse  est  quae 
Domini  sunt,  quomodo  placeat 
Deo,  ut  sit  sancta  corpore  et 
spiritu. ' ' 


Ibid.  VI. 

"Angelus  fuit  Joannes:  ta- 
lem  esse  decebat  Domini  nostri 
praecursorem,  quo  major  non 
fuit  inter  natos  mulieinxm. ' ' 


Phil.  IV.  3. 

"Etiam  rogo  et  te,  germane 
compar,  adjuva  illas,  quae  me- 
cum  laboraverunt  in  Evangelio 
cum  Clemente,  et  ceteris  adju- 
toribus  meis,  quorum  nomina 
sunt  in  libro  vitae. ' ' 


Ibid. 

"Eamdem  viam  amplexati 
sunt  et  Paulus,  et  Barnabas,  et 
Timotheus,  quorum  nomina 
sunt  in  libro  vitae — . ' ' 


644 


THE    CANON    OF    N.    T.    OF    CLEMENT   OF   ROME 


Heb.  XIII.  7. 

'  *  Mementote  praepositorum 
vestrorum,  qui  vobis  locuti 
sunt  verbum  Dei,  quorum  in- 
tuentes  exitum  conversationis, 
imitamini  fidem. ' ' 

I.  Cor.  IV.  16. 

"Rogo  ergo  vos:  Imitatores 
mei  estote,  sicut  et  ego 
Christi." 


Ibid. 

"Scriptum  est  enim:  'Mem- 
entote praepositorum  vestro- 
rum, quorum  intuentes  exitum 
conversationis,  imitamini  fi- 
dem.' " 

Ibid. 

"Et  alibi  dictum  est:  Imi- 
tatores mei  estote,  fratres,  si- 
cut  et  ego  Christi.'  " 


In  the  Eighth  Chapter  of  this  First  Epistle  of  Clement 
to  Virgins,  ten  phrases  occur  bearing  on  them  clearest  evi- 
dence that  they  are  taken  from  the  Pauline  Epistles,  such 
as  for  instance,  "avarice  which  is  the  serving  of  idols." 
(Ephes.  V.  5.) 


Jo.  III.  6. 

"Quod  natum  est  ex  came, 
caro  est,  et  quod  natum  est  ex 
spiritu,  spiritus  est. ' ' 

Ibid.  31. 

"Qui  desursum  venit,  super 
omnes  est.  Qui  est  de  terra, 
de  terra  est,  et  de  terra  loqui- 
tur. Qui  de  coelo  venit,  super 
omnes  est. ' ' 

Rom.  VIII.  7. 

" — Quoniam  sapientia  car- 
nis  inimica  est  Deo;  legi  enim 
Dei  non  est  subjecta,  nee  enim 
potest. ' ' 

Rom.  VIII.  9. 

** — Si  quis  autem  Spiritum 
Christi  non  habet,  hie  non  est 
ejus. ' ' 

I.  Cor.  V.  II. 

" — cum  ejusmodi  nee  cibum 
sumere. ' ' 


Ibid.  VIII. 

"Camales  sunt  isti  omnes 
eorumque  similes:  'quod  enim 
natum  est  de  came  caro  est; 
qui  est  de  terra,  de  terra  est,  et 
de  terra  loquitur,  et  terrena 
sapit:'  'quae  sapientia  inimica 
est  Deo:  legi  enim  Dei  non  est 
subjecta,  nee  enim  potest — .'  ' ' 


Ibid. 

" — si  quis  autem  Spiritum 
Christi  non  habet,  hie  non  est 
ejus. ' ' 

Ibid.  X. 

"Cum  ejusmodi  suademus 
ne  cibum  quidem  sumere. ' ' 


THE  CANON  OF  N.  T.  OF  CLEMENT  OF  ROME 


545 


II.  Thess.  III.  II,  12. 

"Audivimus  enim,  inter  vos 
quosdam  ambulare  inquiete, 
nihil  operantes,  sed  curiose 
agentes.  lis  autem,  qui  ejus- 
modi  sunt,  denuntiamus,  et  ob- 
secramus  in  Domino  Jesu  Chris- 
to,  ut  cum  silentio  operantes, 
suum   panem   manducent. ' ' 


I.  Tim.  I.  7. 

" — volentes  esse  legis  doc- 
tores,  non  intelligentes  neque 
quae  loquuntur,  neque  quibus 
affirmant. ' ' 

I.  Cor.  XII.  28. 

"Et  quosdam  quidem  posuit 
Deus  in  ecclesia  primum  Apos- 
tolos,  secundo  Prophetas,  ter- 
tio  Doctores — . ' ' 

St.  Jac.  III.  2. 

"In  multis  enim  offendimus 
omnes.  Si  quis  in  verbo  non 
offendit,  hie  perfectus  est  vir; 
potest  etiam  freno  circumdu- 
cere  totum  corpus. ' ' 

I.  Pet.  IV.  II. 

' '  Si  quis  loquitur  quasi  ser- 
mones  Dei — . ' ' 

Coloss.  IV.  6. 

' '  Sermo  vester  semper  in  gra- 
tia sale  sit  conditus,  ut  sciatis, 
quomodo  oporteat  vos  unicui- 
que  respondere.  * ' 

Rom.  XVI.  18. 
"Hujuscemodi    enim  Chris- 
to  Domino  nostro  non  serviunt, 


Ibid. 

"Sed  reipsa  sola  ducuntur 
otiositate,  cum  sint  ipsi  non 
solum  otiosi,  sed  et  verbosi,  et 
curiosi,  loquentes  quae  non  op- 
ortet.  Hi,  per  dulces  sermo- 
nes ,  quaestum  venantur  in  no- 
mine Christi.  Hos  sinistra 
praefigit  nota  divinus  Aposto- 
lus multa  mala  in  eis  redar- 
guens. ' ' 

Ibid.  XL 

"Sed  sunt  inquieti,  non  in- 
telligentes quae  loquuntur,  ne- 
que de  quibus  affirmant. 

Ibid. 

"Hanc  autem  viam  multi 
sequuntur,  quia  non  animad- 
vertunt  quod  scriptum  est: 
'Non  multos  in  vobis,  fratres, 
positos  esse  doctores  et  prop- 
betas';  et  iterum:  'Si  quis  in 
verbo  non  offendit,  hie  perfec- 
tus est  vir.  Potest  etiam  freno 
circumducere  totum  corpus. 
Si  quis  loquitur,  quasi  sermo- 
nes  Dei — . ' ' 


Ibid. 

" — et  iterum:  Sermo  ves- 
ter semper  in  gratia  sale  sit  con- 
ditus, ut  sciatis  quomodo  opor- 
teat vos  unicuique  respon- 
dere—. ' ' 

Ibid. 

' '  Quidam  tandem  beatum 
populum  dicunt,  et  per  dulces 


35  (H.S.) 


546 


THE  CANON  •OF  N.  T.  OF  CLEMENT  OF  ROME 


sed  suo  ventri;  et  per  dulces 
sermones  et  benedictiones 
seducunt  cor  da  innocentium. ' ' 

Math.  XV.  14. 

"Sinite  illos:  caeci  sunt,  et 
duces  caecorum:  caecus  autem 
si  caeco  ducatum  praestet,  ambo 
in  foveam  cadunt. ' ' 


This  is  a  scriptural  mosaic 
made  up  of  Galat.  V.  10;  Jas. 
III.  15;  I.  Cor.  II.  4;  and  Ephes. 
II.  2:    ' 

" — in  quibus  aHquando  am- 
bulastis  secundum  saeculum 
mundi  hujus,  secundum  princi- 
pem  potestatis  aeris  hujus, 
spiritus,  qui  nunc  operatur  in 
fihos  diffidentiae. ' ' 


Math.  XVII.  20. 

"Hoc  autem  genus  non  ejici- 
tur  nisi  per  orationem  et  jeju- 
nium. ' ' 


Math.  X.  8. 

"Infirmos  curate,  mortuos 
suscitate,  leprosos  mundate, 
dsemones  ejicite:  gratis  accepis- 
tis,  gratis  date. ' ' 

Math.  XXV.  36. 

" — ^nudus,  et  cooperuistis 
me:  infirmus,  et  visitastis  me: 
in  carcere  eram,  et  venistis  ad 
me. " 


sermones  et  benedictiones,  se- 
ducunt corda  innocentium. ' ' 


Ibid. 

"Hi  sunt  veluti  caecus  qui 
caeco  ducatum  praestat,  quique 
ambo  in  foveam  cadunt. ' ' 


Ibid. 

"Hi  portabunt  judicium, 
quia  sapientiam  animalem  va- 
numque  mendacium  garruU  in- 
anique  scientia  inflati  praedi- 
cant  in  persuasibihbus  hu- 
manae  sapientiae  verbis,  secun- 
dum saeculum  mundi  hujus, 
secundum  principem  potesta- 
tis aeris  hujus,  spiritus  qui 
operatur  in  filios  diffidentiae,  et 
non  secundum  doctrinam 
Chris ti. ' ' 

Ibid.  XII. 

" — non  enim  agunt  cum 
recta  fide,  et  juxta  doctrinam 
Domini  qui  dixit:  'Hoc  genus 
daemoniorum  non  ejicitur  nisi 
per  orationem  et  jejunium.'  " 

Ibid. 

"Vos  igitur  quibus  dictum 
est:  'Gratis  accepistis,  gratis 
date—.'  " 


Ibid. 

"Pr£eclarum  ac  utile  est  ut 
servi  Domini  morem  gerant,  in- 
ter caetera  similia,  huic  prae- 
cepto  divino:  'Infirmus  eram, 
et  visitastis  me.'  " 


THE  CANON  OF  N.  T.  OF  CLEMENT  OF  ROME 


547 


II.  Cor.  XL  29. 

' '  Quis  infirmatur,  et  ego  non 
infirmor?  quis  scandalizatur,  et 
ego  non  uror  ?   ' ' 

Math.  IX.  37,  s^. 

"Tunc  dicit  discipulis  suis: 
Messis  quidem  multa,  operarii 
autem  pauci.  Rogate  ergo 
Dominum  messis,  ut  mittat 
operarios  in  messem  suam. ' ' 

Jo.  VI.  27. 

"Operamini  non  cibum,  qui 
perit,  sed  qui  permanet  in  vi- 
tam  aetemam — . ' ' 

Luke  I.  75. 

" — in  sanctitate  et  justitia 
coram  ipso  omnibus  diebus 
nostris. ' ' 

Coloss.  I.  10. 

" — ut  ambuletis  digne  Deo 
per  omnia  placentes — . ' ' 

II.  Cor.  VIII.  21. 

' '  Providemus  enim  bona  non 
solum  coram  Deo,  sed  etiam  co- 
ram hominibus. ' ' 

I.  Tim.  II.  3. 

"Hoc  enim  bonum  est  et  ac- 
ceptum  coram  Salvatore  nos- 
tro  Deo—. ' ' 

II.  Cor.  VL  3. 

Nemini  dantes  ullam  off en- 
sionem,  ut  non  vituperetur 
ministerium  nostrum — . ' ' 


Ibid. 

' '  — memores  verborum  Apos- 
toli:  'Quis  infirmatur,  et  ego 
non  infirmor?  Quis  scandali- 
zatur, et  non  uror?"  ' 

Ibid.  XIII. 

"Memores  enim  esse  debent 
messem  quidem  esse  multam, 
operarios  autem  paucos:  ideo- 
que  rogent  Dominum  messis  ut 
mittat  operarios  in  messem 
suam — . ' ' 

Ibid. 

' '  — operarios  qui  operentur 
non  cibum  qui  perit,  sed  qui  per- 
manet in  vitam  aetemam — ." 

Ibid. 

"Sic  Domino  serviemus  in 
sanctitate  et  justitia  coram 
ipso,  per  omnia  placentes, 
providentes  bona,  non  solum 
coram  Deo,  sed  etiam  coram 
hominibus:  hoc  enim  bonum 
est  et  acceptum — . ' ' 


St.   Clementis  Epist.   II.  ad 
Virgines,  III. 

" — solliciti  quippe  sumus  ne 
quis  in  nobis  offendatur  aut 
scandalizetur:      Nemini     dan- 


548 


THE  CANON  OF  N.  T.  OF  CLEMENT  OF  ROME 


11.  Cor.  V.  II. 

"Scientes  ergo  timorem  Do- 
mini hominibus  suademus,  Deo 
autem  manifesti  sumus. ' ' 

I.  Tim.  V.  lo. 

" — in  operibus  bonis  testi- 
monium habens,  si  filios  edu- 
cavit,  si  hospitio  recepit,  si 
sanctorum  pedes  lavit,  si  tribu- 
lationem  patientibus  submini- 
stravit,  si  omne  opus  bonum 
subsecuta  est. " 

I.  Cor.  X.  33. 

" — sicut  et  ego  per  omnia 
omnibus  placeo,  non  quaerens, 
quod  mihi  utile  est,  sed  quod 
multis,  ut  salvi  fiant. ' ' 

Rom.  XIV.  15. 

Si  enim  propter  cibum  frater 
tuus  contristatur,  jam  non  se- 
cundum caritatem  ambulas. 
Noli  cibo  tuo  ilium  perdere,  pro 
quo  Christus  mortuus  est.  " 

I.  Cor.  VIII.  12. 

'  *  Sic  autem  peccantes  in  fra- 
tres,  et  percutientes  conscien- 
tiam  eorum  infirmam,  in  Chris- 
tum peccatis. ' ' 

Math.  X.  16. 

"Ecce,  ego  mitto  vos  sicut 
oves  in  medio  luporum.  Es- 
tote  ergo  prudentes  sicut  ser- 
pentes,  et  simplices  sicut  col- 
umbae. ' ' 


tes  ullam  offensionem,  ut  non 
vituperetur  ministerium  nos- 
trum. ' ' 

Ibid. 

'*Scientes  ergo  timorem  Do- 
mini, hominibus  suademus; 
Deo  autem  manifesti  sumus. ' ' 

Ibid.  IV. 

"Haec  autem  prae  aliis  senes- 
cens  mulier  eligitur  quas  diu 
probata  est  assiduitate  medita- 
tionum,  hincque  perspecta  si 
filios  educavit,  si  hospitio  re- 
cepit, si  sanctorum  pedes 
lavit." 

Ibid.  V. 

' '  — ^nec  quaerimus  quod  nobis 
utile  est,  sed  quod  multis,  ut 
salvi  fiant. ' ' 


Ibid. 

"Hinc  Paulus:  'Noli  cibo 
tuo,  inquit,  ilium  perdere  pro 
quo  Christus  mortuus  est;'  et 
alibi :  '  Sic  autem  peccantes  in 
fratres,  et  percutientes  con- 
scientiam  eorum  infirmam,  in 
Christum    peccatis.'  " 


Ibid.  VI. 

'' — debemus  esse  prudentes 
sicut  serpentes,  et  simplices 
sicut  columbae,  non  quasi  insip- 
ientes,  sed  ut  sapientes — . ' ' 


THE  CANON  OF  N.  T.  OF  CLEMENT  OF  ROME 


549 


Ephes.  V.  15,  16. 

"Videte  itaque,  frates,  quo- 
modo  caute  ambuletis:  non 
quasi  insipientes,  sed  ut  sap- 
ientes. ' ' 

Math.  VII.  6. 


Ibid. 


"Nolite  dare  sanctum  cani-  " — ^ne  demus  sanctum  cani- 

bus:  neque  mittatis  margaritas  bus,    mittamusque  margaritas 

vestras  ante  porcos— . ' '  ante  porcos — . ' ' 

I.  Cor.  X.  12.  Ibid.  XIII. 


"Itaque,   qui  se  existimat 
stare,  videat  ne  cadat. ' ' 

I.  Tim.  V.  II. 

"  Adolescentiores  autem  vid- 
uas  devita:  cum  enim  luxuri- 
atae  fuerint  in  Christo,  nubere 
volunt — . ' ' 


Joa.  IV.  27. 

"Et  continue  venerunt  dis- 
cipuli  ejus  et  mirabantur,  quia 
cum  muliere  loquebatur,"  etc. 


"Et  iterum:  Qui  se  existi- 
mat stare,  videat  ne  cadat. ' ' 

Ibid.  XIV. 

*  *  Nullum  porro  sanctum  ani- 
madvertetis  frequenter  fuisse 
conversatum  cum  virginibus 
aut  adolescentioribus  virorum 
uxoribus  vel  viduis,  quas  devi- 
tandas  esse  divinus  docet  Apos- 
tolus. ' ' 

Ibid.  XV. 


' '  De  ipso  Domino  Jesu  Chris- 
to scriptum  est,  quod  venientes 
discipuli,  et  videntes  eum  prope 
fontem  seorsim  cum  Samarit- 
ana  sermocinantem  mirabantur 
quia  cum  muliere  loquebatur. ' ' 

Therefore  the  Fourth  Gospel  scriptum  est,  and  was  recog- 
nized as  Holy  Scripture  in  Clement's  time. 


Jo.  XX.  17. 

"  Dicit  ei  Jesus:  Noli  me  tan- 
gere,  nondum  enim  ascendi  ad 
Patrem  meum:  vade  autem  ad 
fratres  meos,  et  die  eis:  Ascen- 
do  ad  Patrem  meum^et  Patrem 
vestrum,  Deum^meum  et  Deum 
vestrvim. ' ' 


Ibid. 

"Insuper,  postquam  Domi- 
nus  a  mortuis  surrexit,  cum 
Maria  ad  sepulcrum  properas- 
set,  eumque  adorans,  ipsius  pe- 
des tenere  voluisset:  'Noli,  in- 
quit,  me  tangere:  nondum 
enim  ascendi  ad  Patrem 
meum." 


550  THE    CANON    OF    N.    T.    OF    CLEMENT   OF    ROME 

Phil.  III.   1 6.  Ibid.  XVI. 

"  VeFumtamen  ad  quod  per-  "Idcirco,    fratres,    rogamus, 

venimus,    ut    idem    sapiamus,  vos  in  Domino,  ut  idem  sapia- 

et     in     eadem     permaneamus  mus,   et  in   eadem  permanea- 

regula. ' '  mus  regula — . ' ' 

I.  Jo.  IV.  6.  Ibid. 

"Nos  ex   Deo   sumus.     Qui  "  Qui  no vit  Deum,  audit  nos: 

non    est   ex   Deo,   non     audit  qui  non  est  ex  Deo,  non  audit 

nos,"  etc.  nos. " 

We  have  only  selected  some  of  the  clearest  quotations 
from  our  books.  Many  more  allusions  to  New  Testament 
books  exist  in  Clement's  works. 

Eusebius  testifies  that  Clement,  in  his  First  Epistle  to  the 
Corinthians,  "gives  many  sentiments  taken  from  the  Epistle 
to  the  Hebrews,  and  also  literally  quoting  the  words,  he  most 
clearly  shows  that  this  work  is  by  no  means  a  late  production. 
Whence  it  is  probable  that  this  was  also  numbered  with  the 
other  writings  of  the  Apostles."  (Hist.  Eccles.  III.  38.) 
More  than  twenty  texts,  some  of  them  of  considerable  length, 
are  found  in  Clement's  Epistle,  which  in  the  sense  and  order 
of  the  words  agree  with  the  Epistle  to  Hebrews. 

Those  who  would  still  contend  that  these  quotations  come 
from  oral  tradition,  merit  to  be  classed  with  those  of  whom 
divine  Dante  sings:  '*Non  ragioniam  di  loro,  ma  guardae 
passa."  "Let  us  not  speak  of  them,  but  look,  and  pass." 
(Inferno  III.  51.) 

The  works  of  Clement  show  that  at  Rome,  toward  the 
close  of  the  first  century,  at  least  the  Four  Gospels,  Eleven 
Epistles  of  Paul,  the  First  Epistle  of  Peter,  the  First  Epistle  of 
John,  and  the  Epistle  of  St.  James  were  known  and  recog- 
nized as  Holy  Scripture. 

The  testimony  of  Basilides,  a  heretic  of  the  first  part  of 
the  second  century,  confirms  the  existence  of  the  written 
Gospels,  and  certain  of  Paul's  Epistles.  According  to  Euse- 
bius, Hist.  Eccles.  IV.  7.,  Basilides  edited  a  commentary 
on  the  Evangelium.  In  the  Philosophumena,  VII.  20,  we 
find  this  testimony:  "Basilides  said  that  out  of  nothing 
(eK   ov/c   ovTcov)    was    made  the  germ  of    the  universe,  the 


THE    CANON    OF    N.    T.    OF   IGNATIUS  551 

word,  as  it  is  said :  Xet  there  be  light' ;  and  this  is  what  is 
said  in  the  Gospels:  'He  was  the  true  light  that  enlighteneth 
every  man  that  cometh  into  this  world.'  "  Quotations  from 
the  Pauline  Epistles  are  often  used  by  Basilides  with  the 
formulas :  "  It  is  written , "  *  'The  Scripture  saith . ' '  Accord- 
ing to  Origen,  Basilides  commented  the  Epistle  to  the 
Romans.  In  Origen's  Commentary  on  Romans,  Lib.  V.  i, 
we  find  the  following : 

"Sed  hasc  Basilides  non  advertens  de  lege  naturali  debere 
intelligi,  ad  ineptas  et  impias  fabulas  sermonem  apostolicum 
traxit,  et  in  fieTeva-co/xarcoo-eco^  dogma,  id  est,  quod  animae  in 
alia  atque  alia  corpora  transfundantur,  ex  hoc  Apostoli  dicto 
conatur  astruere.  Dixit  enim,  inquit,  Apostolus,  quia  'ego 
vivebam  sine  lege  aliquando':  hoc  est,  antequam  in  istud 
corpus  venirem,  in  ea  specie  corporis  vixi,  quae  sub  lege  non 
esset ;  pecudis  scilicet,  vel  avis.  Sed  non  respexit  ad  id  quod 
sequitur,  id  est :  'Sed  ubi  venit  mandatum,  peccatum  revixit.' 
Non  enim  dixit  se  venisse  ad  mandatum,  sed  ad  se  venisse 
mandatum ;  et  peccatum  non  dixit  non  fuisse  in  se,  sed  mor- 
tuum,  fuisse,  et  revixisse.  In  quo  utique  ostendit  quod  de 
una  eademque  vita  sua  utrumque  loqueretur.  Verum  Basi- 
lides, et  si  qui  cum  ipso  hoc  sentiunt,  in  sua  impietate  relin- 
qiiantur." 

The  works  of  Ignatius,  (Martyr)  reveal  that  he  was  con- 
versant with  a  written  code  of  the  New  Law.  However,  not 
all  the  texts  that  are  usually  brought  forward  from  Ignatius' 
works  are  valid  to  prove  that  he  spoke  of  a  written  Gospel. 
The  first  text  is  taken  from  the  fifth  chapter  of  his  Epistle  to 
those  of  Smyrna :  "Fools  deny  him  (Jesus  Christ)  .  .  .  whom 
the  prophets  could  not  convince,  nor  the  Law  of  Moses,  nor 
the  Gospel,  even  to  this  day."  Although  I  believe  that 
Ignatius  here  speaks  of  a  written  Gospel,  nevertheless,  in  con- 
troversy it  could  be  maintained  that  the  words  would  be 
apposite,  even  though  the  oral  teaching  of  Christ  alone 
existed. 

The  next  passage  is  from  the  seventh  chapter  of  the  same 
Epistle:  "It  behooves  us  ...  to  pay  heed  to  the  Prophets, 
and  especially  to  the  Gospel  wherein  the  Passion  is  taught 
us,  and  the  Resurrection  perfectly  demonstrated."     This  is 


552  THE   CANON   OF   N.    T.    OF   IGNATIUS 

somewhat  cogent,  but  not  apodictic.  It  is  certainly  far 
more  probable  that  Ignatius,  in  placing  together  these  two 
sources  of  doctrine  in  the  present  phrase,  spoke  of  two  things 
of  similar  nature,  both  being  written  instruments. 

The  next  testimony  of  Ignatius  is  taken  from  Ignatius' 
Epistle  to  those  of  Philadelphia,  VIII -IX. :  "I  hear  certain 
ones  saying:  *  'Eai^  /jltj  ev  toU  apxeLOi<;  evpco^  ev  rw  evayyeXiw  ov 
iriaTeM .  And  when  I  say  to  them  that  it  is  written,  they 
answer:  this  is  to  be  demonstrated.  But  my  archives  are 
Jesus  Christ,  my  spotless  archives  are  his  cross,  his  death, 
his  resurrection,  and  the  faith  which  comes  from  him.  .  .  . 
The  priests  are  good,  but  the  High  Priest  is  better  .  .  . 
through  whom  the  Prophets  and  the  Apostles  and  the  Church 
enters  (into  the  Holy  of  Holies) .  But  the  Gospel  has  some- 
thing of  special  excellence,  to  wit :  the  advent  of  Our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  his  Passion  and  Resurrection.  The  beloved 
Prophets  announced  him ;  but  the  Gospel  is  the  perfection  of 
eternal  life." 

The  key  to  this  testimony  consists  in  the  Greek  passage. 
Some  expunge  the  comma  after  the  t«  euayyeXLco,  and 
translate  it :  Unless  I  find  evidence  in  the  ancient  writings, 
I  will  not  believe  the  Gospel.  This  version  is  approved  by 
Light  foot,  Apostolic  Fathers,  Vol.  III.  p.  37.  This  version 
is  rejected  by  Funk,  (Patres  Apost.  i,  230),  Comely  (Intro- 
duction I.  159),  and  Loisy  (Canon  du  Nouveau  Test.,  28). 
They  insist  on  the  fact  that  the  laws  of  the  Greek  language 
permit  no  such  sense.  They  instead  place  to)  evayyeXio) 
in  apposition  to  rot?  apxeioL^;,  in  which  case  it  would 
certainly  refer  to  a  written  Gospel.  Though  the  Greek  con- 
struction is  somewhat  rough,  I  am  disposed  to  accept  the 
first  opinion.  The  context  and  line  of  argument  evince  that 
Ignatius  was  arguing  against  those  who  demanded  an  exces- 
sive verification  of  prophecy  for  faith  in  the  Gospel.  The 
TO,  apx^la  were  the  prophecies  of  the  Old  Law.  Against 
them  he  first  responds,  that  the  doctrines  of  the  New  Law 
are  founded  on  the  prophecies.  And  then  to  their  cavils,  he 
exclaims  that  for  him  there  is  no  need  of  prophecy  to  sub- 
stantiate New  Testament  teaching.  For  Christ  and  the 
Cross  merit  faith,  irrespective  of  prophecy.     Finally,  he  says, 


THE   CANON   OF   N.    T.    OP   IGNATIUS  553 

as  Jesus  Christ  is  greater  than  the  Prophets,  so  the  Gospel  is 
better  than  the  Prophecies.  Although  the  mere  textual 
structure  of  the  sentence  does  not  necessarily  imply  a  written 
Gospel  the  context  and  sense  of  the  testimony  plainly  point 
to  such.  Not  so  much  in  any  one  word  as  in  the  whole  pas- 
sage does  it  become  evident  that  Ignatius  is  speaking  of  a 
written  instrument  which  he  is  comparing,  like  with  like,  to 
the  Prophets,  and  extolling  above  them.  This  sense  is  cor- 
roborated by  a  testimony  in  his  Epistle  to  those  of  Philadel- 
phia, Chapter  V. :  "Let  us  turn  to  the  Gospel,  as  to  Christ 
corporally  present,  and  to  the  Apostles  as  to  the  priesthood 
of  the  Church.  Let  us  love  also  the  Prophets,  because  they 
announced  Christ."  This  testimony  evidently  speaks  of  the 
Gospels,  and  the  other  writings  of  the  New  Law  which  per- 
petuated Christ  and  his  Apostles  on  earth. 

In  his  practical  use  of  Scripture,  in  his  genuine  Epistles, 
Ignatius  assimilates  the  truths  of  Scripture,  and  then  adduces 
them  in  his  own  words,  so  that  exact  quotations  are  not 
therein  found,  but  many  places  evidence  that  he  drew  largely 
from  the  New  Testament  writings.  Such  allusions  are  very 
frequent  in  the  Apostolic  Fathers.  This  the  rationalists 
themselves  concede.* 

*Reuss  (Hist,  du  Canon  Strasb.  1863,  p.  23):  "A  la  v^rit6  on  ne  d6- 
couvre  pas  encore  dans  ces  epitres  (Patrum  apostolicorum)  des  citations 
nominatives  k  de  rares  exceptions  pres.  .  .et  surtout  les  textes  des  apotres 
ne  sont  nulle  part  invoqu6s  express^ment  et  lit^ralment  comme  des  autor- 
it^s  (Cfr.  tamen  Polyc,  ad  Philip.  13).  Mais  ils  sont  quelquefois  exploit^s 
tacitement  de  fagon  qu'il  est  impossible  de  s'y  tromper;  en  certains  en- 
droits,  les  exhortations  rev6tent  les  formules  employees  par  ces  illustres 
pr^d^cesseurs,  et  Ton  se  convainc  facilement  que  les  ecrivains  de  cette 
seconds  generation  faisaient  dejd  une  etude  des  autres  de  la  premiere.  C'est 
ainsi  que  la  lettre  de  Clement  offre  des  reminiscences  assez  precises  de 
quelques  passages  des  6pitres  aux  Romains  et  aux  Corinthiens  et  surtout 
de  celle  aux  Hebreux;  celles  d'Ignace,  plus  nombreuses  (quee  tamen  simul 
sumtffi  vix  priorem  Clementis  longitudine  aequant)  et  en  tout  cas  beau- 
coup  plus  recentes,  en  presentent  d'autres  <^ui  nous  ramenent  aux  epitres 
aux  Corinthiens  et  aux  Galates  ainsi  qu'al'Bvangilede  Jean;  enfin  la  toute 
petite  epitre  de  Polycarpe  contient  de  fr^quentes  allusions  k  des  passages 
apostoliques,  notamment  aux  Actes,  a  la  premiere  6pitre  de  Pierre,  k  celles 
aux  Rom.,  aux  Cor.,  aux  Gal.,  aux  Ephes.,  et  k  la  premiere  k  Timoth^e. 
Encore  une  fois,  cet  usage  est  purement  homiletique  ou  rhetorique;  nulle 
part  un  nom  d'apotre,  une  formule  de  citation  (?),  vm  avis  quelconque 
n'avertit  le  lecteur  que  les  paroles,  que  nous  reconnaissons  imm^diate- 
ment  comme  des  dl^mentes  d'emprtmt,  aient  une  valeur  particuliere  et 
diff^rente  de  celles  de  I'entourage."      (Comely,  op.  cit.  pag.  160). 


554  THE    CANON    OF    N.    T.    OF   PAPIAS 

We  may  also  adduce  here  the  testimony  of  Papias,  who, 
according  to  Irenasus,  was  a  disciple  of  St.  John,  and  a  com- 
panion of  Polycarp.  The  testimony  as  preserved  to  us  by 
Eusebius  (Hist.  Eccles.  III.  XXXIX.)  is  as  follows:  "That 
priest  (St.  John)  was  wont  to  say  that  Mark,  the  interpreter 
of  Peter,  wrote  down  diligently  whatever  he  remembered,  but 
he  followed  not  the  order  of  the  Lord's  words  and  deeds. 
For  he  had  never  heard  the  Lord,  or  followed  him  .  .  .  Where- 
fore, Mark  erred  in  nothing,  writing  certain  things  as  he 
remembered  them." 

Of  Matthew,  Papias  writes  thus:  "Matthew,  he  said, 
wrote  the  discourses  (of  the  Lord)  in  the  Hebrew  tongue; 
men  translated  them  as  every  one  was  able. ' '  The  Gospel  of 
Matthew  is  termed  the  Xoyia  (KvpLaKci),  since  it  contains 
more  of  the  Lord's  discourses  than  any  other  Gospel.  Though 
it  is  impossible  to  fix  the  certain  date  of  Papias'  writing,  we 
are  sure  that  he  touches  the  Apostolic  age,  and  records  that 
which  he  received  from  those  of  the  Apostolic  age.  His 
testimony  is  conclusive  for  the  existence  in  the  first  century 
of  the  written  Gospels  of  Matthew  and  Mark.  Eusebius 
also,  in  the  same  place,  declares  that  "the  same  Papias  made 
use  of  testimonies  taken  from  the  first  Epistle  of  St.  John  and 
the  first  of  Peter."  The  Gospel  of  Matthew  has  also  in  its 
favor  the  testimony  of  Eusebius  concerning  St.  Pantaenus, 
"who  moved  by  divine  zeal,  and  fired  by  the  example  of  the 
Apostles  ...  is  said  to  have  penetrated  even  to  the  Indies, 
and  to  have  found  there  the  Gospel  of  Matthew,  which  had 
preceded  him,  and  was  held  by  certain  ones  who  had  em- 
braced Christianity.  It  is  said  that  Bartholomew,  one  of  the 
twelve  preached  to  these,  and  left  them  the  Gospel  of 
Matthew,  written  in  Hebrew." 

We  find,  therefore,  that  at  the  end  of  the  first  century  the 
Canon  of  the  four  Gospels  was  in  universal  acceptance  in  all 
the  Christian  communities.  In  the  first  quarter  of  the  sec- 
ond century  we  find  the  Epistles  of  St.  Paul  in  all  the  great 
Churches.  Certainly  Clement  of  Rome,  Ignatius  (Martyr) 
and  Polycarp  had  a  collection  of  Pauline  Epistles,  and  sup- 
posed the  same  to  exist  with  those  to  whom  they  wrote. 
The  whole  fourteen  Epistles  may  not  have  been  equally 


THE  CANON  OF  N.  T.  OF  II.  CENTURY       555 

known,  but  Loisy  (op.  cit.)  who  is  not  disposed  to  be  too 
favorable  to  the  Catholic  position,  admits  thirteen  in  the  col- 
lection then  received. 

The  Acts  of  the  Apostles  are  used  by  Ignatius,  Poly  carp 
and  Clement  of  Rome.  The  Epistle  of  James,  the  First 
Epistle  of  Peter,  and  First  of  John,  have  clearest  testimonies. 
St.  Irenaeus  (Contra  Hsereses  V.  30)  declares  that  those  who 
saw  John  face  to  face  bear  witness  to  the  Apocalypse.  He 
evidently  means  by  such  phrase,  Papias  and  Poly  carp. 
There  is  no  clear  testimony  of  the  Apostolic  age  for  the 
Epistle  of  Philemon,  the  Second  Epistle  of  Peter,  the  Second 
and  Third  of  John,  and  the  Epistle  of  Jude.  It  would  not  be 
just  to  infer  from  this  that  they  were  not  known  then.  But 
little  of  the  literary  product  of  that  age  has  come  down  to  us ; 
and  besides,  the  character  of  these  writings  was  less  useful 
for  the  scope  for  which  the  early  Fathers  employed  the  Scrip- 
tures. 

Passing  from  the  Apostolic  Fathers  to  their  immediate 
successors,  the  testimonies  increase  in  number  and  clearness. 

St.  Justin  (ti63)  testifies  (Apologia  I.  66) :  "For  the 
Apostles  in  their  Memorabilia  (airoiJLVTjfiovevfjiaTa)  which 
are  called  Gospels,  declare  that  Jesus  thus  commanded  them ; 
that  he  took  bread,  and,  having  given  thanks,  said:  *Do 
this  in  rememberance  of  me ;  this  is  my  body' ;  and  also  taking 
the  chalice,  and  giving  thanks,  he  said :   'This  is  my  blood.'  " 

Justin's  peculiar  term  for  the  Gospels  is,  nevertheless, 
apt ;  for  they  wrote  down  the  principal  words  and  deeds  of 
the  Lord,  as  they  remembered  them. 

In  paragraph  67,  he  again  speaks  of  the  Gospels:  *'0n 
what  is  called  the  day  of  the  sun,  all  the  dwellers  of  the  cities 
and  the  fields  gather  in  one  place,  and  the  Memorabilia  of  the 
Apostles,  or  the  writings  of  the  Prophets  are  read,  as  time 
permits." 

Again  in  his  dialogue  against  Tryphon,  103 :  "For  in  the 
Memorabilia,  which  I  place  to  have  been  written  b}^  his 
Apostles  and  their  disciples,  it  is  stated  that  sweat  like  drops 
of  blood  flowed  from  him,  when  he  prayed  and  said:  *If  it 
be  possible,  let  this  chalice  pass. '  "  There  is  an  evident  allu- 
sion to  St.  Luke's  Gospel  here,  for  only  Luke  speaks  of  the 
sweat  like  drops  of  blood. 


556  THE    CANON    OF    N.    T.    OF  JUSTIN 

Again  in  the  same  paragraph  we  find:  " Immediately- 
after  Jesus  ascended  from  the  River  Jordan,  where  the  voice 
came  upon  him :  Thou  art  my  son ;  to-day  have  I  begotten 
thee/  it  is  written  in  the  MemorabiHa  of  the  Apostles,  that 
Satan  approached  him,  and  tempted  him,  saying :  'Adore 
me.'  And  Christ  answered:  'Begone  from  me,  Satan;  the 
Lord  thy  God  shalt  thou  adore,  and  him  only  shalt  thou 
serve.'  " 

We  find  an  allusion  to  the  fourth  Gospel  in  Paragraph 
105  of  the  Dialogue:  **I  have  before  demonstrated,  as  we 
learn  from  the  Memorabilia,  that  the  Only-begotten  of  the 
Father  of  the  universe  is  properly  the  Word,  and  power 
begotten  of  him,  and  afterwards  bom  a  man  of  the  Virgin." 
Only  John  calls  Christ  the  Word. 

St.  Justin  in  his  Dialogue  against  Tryphon  the  Jew,  81, 
has  a  clear  testimony  for  the  Apocalypse:  **And  in  addi- 
tion to  these  things,  a  man  from  among  us,  John  by  name,  a 
disciple  of  the  Lord,  in  an  Apocalypse  made  known  to  him, 
prophesies  that  those  who  have  believed  in  Christ  will  dwell 
at  Jerusalem  for  a  thousand  years,  and  then  will  be  the  gen- 
eral, in  a  word,  the  eternal  resurrection,  and  the  future  judg- 
ment." 

The  few  works  that  remain  of  Justin  are  filled  with  pas- 
sages taken  from  the  Gospels,  without  acknowledgment  of 
source. 

St.  Justin,  in  Apologia  pro  Christ ianis,  L  63,  speaking  of 
Christ,  says:  ''He  is  called  an  angel  and  an  Apostle."  It 
is  only  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  III.  i,  that  Christ  is 
called  an  Apostle. 

In  his  Treatise  against  Tryphon,  33,  he  draws  a  com- 
parison between  Christ  and  Melchisedech,  clearly  revealing 
knowledge  of  Epistle  to  Hebrews,  V.  8-10.  Traces  also  are 
found  in  his  works  of  all  the  other  books  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment, except  the  Epistle  of  St.  Jude,  the  Second  Epistle  of 
St.  Peter,  and  the  Second  and  Third  of  St.  John. 

One  of  the  disciples  of  St.  Justin  was  the  famous  Tatian. 
According  to  the  most  probable  critical  data,  Tatian  was  by 
origin  a  Syrian.  He  visited  Rome  with  Justin,  and  then 
returned  to  his  native  country  and  fixed  his  domicile  at 


THE    CANON    OF    N.    T.    OF    CHURCH    OF    EDESSA  557 

Edessa.  He  composed  there  his  famous  Diatessaron,  or 
harmony  of  the  four  Gospels  in  Syriac.  This  work  was,  in 
1888,  translated  into  Latin  b}^  Cardinal  Ciasca,  from  the 
iVrabic  version  of  Abul-Pharag.  The  Diatessaron  was  a 
harmonized  account  of  the  Gospel  data  taken  from  the  four 
Gospels.  It  remained  the  official  Gospel  of  the  Syrian 
Church,  through  the  time  of  St.  Ephrem,  even  to  the  fifth 
century,  when  it  was  superseded  by  the  individual  Gospels. 

It  is  certain,  therefore,  that  the  Church  of  Edessa,  in  the 
first  half  of  the  second  century,  possessed  the  written  Gos- 
pels in  the  form  of  the  Diatessaron.  It  is  not  easy  to  fix 
what  other  books  entered  into  their  collection. 

^  In  the  "Doctrina  Addai,"  which  reflects  the  old  tradition 
of  the  Church  of  Edessa  on  the  Canon  of  Scriptures,  the 
following  declaration  is  placed  in  the  mouth  of  the  dying 
Addai:*  "The  Law,  the  Prophets  and  the  Gospel,  which 
you  read  daily  to  the  people,  and  the  Epistles  of  Paul,  which 
Simon  Peter  sent  us  from  Rome,  and  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles 
which  John,  the  son  of  Zebedee,  sent  us  from  Ephesus — these 
are  the  Scriptures  that  ye  should  read  in  the  Church  of 
Christ ,  and  ye  should  read  naught  else . ' '  (Doctrine  of  Addai 
ed.  Phillips,  1876,  p.  46). 

This  testimony  is  valuable  only  in  its  affirmative  sense. 
It  makes  known  that  in  the  Church  of  Edessa,  the  Gospels, 
the  Epistles  of  Paul,  and  the  Acts  had  been  canonized. 
The  omission  of  the  other  books  is  due  to  the  strange 
genius  of  Tatian,  which  moved  in  independent  lines.  The 
Canon  of  the  early  Church  of  Edessa,  was,  doubtless,  formed 
by  him,  and  he  excluded  those  books  which  his  caprice 
found  less  acceptable. 

*The  name  Addai  seems  to  be  a  Syriac  approximation  to  the  name  of 
Thaddeus  the  Apostle.  The  "Doctrina  Addai"  is  the  apocryphal  acts  of 
this  Apostle.  This  work  was  published  in  the  Syriac  original  by  Cureton. 
(Ancient  Syriac  Documents,  London,  1864.)  It  has  more  recently  been 
studied  by  Lipsius  CJ)ie  cdciienijdie  ^bgor — fope,  Bininswick,  1880)  and  the 
Abb6  Tixeront  (Les  Origines  de  I'Eglise  d'Edesse,  Paris,  1888). 

It  is  a  work  ranging  between  the  end  of  the  third  and  beginning  of  the 
fourth  century.  Its  source  is  a  legend  known  to  Eusebius,  and  extending 
back  to  the  first  half  of  the  third  century.  Though  the  work  is  apocryphal 
it  is  founded  on  the  tradition  of  the  Edessene  Church  of  that  period. 


558  THE    CANON   OF    N.    T.    OF   MARCION 

The  Epistle  to  Diognetus  speaks  of  the  Gospels  in  the 
plural  number  as  a  body  of  writings  existing  side  by  side 
with  the  Law  and  the  Prophets.*  "The  reverence  of  the 
Law  is  chanted,  and  the  grace  of  the  Prophets  is  known,  and 
the  faith  of  the  Gospels  is  built  tip,  and  the  teaching  {7rapd8oat<i) 
of  the  Apostles  is  preserved,  and  the  grace  of  the  Church 
exults." 

Melito  of  Sardis,  according  to  Eusebius  (Hist.  Eccles, 
IV.  26)  wrote  a  commentary  on  the  Apocalypse  of  St.  John. 
The  work  has  not  been  preserved  for  us. 

Marcion  rejected  the  Old  Testament,  and  mutilated  the 
New.f  He  foimd  a  fundamental,  repugnance  between  the 
Law  and  the  Gospel.  Since  the  New  Testament  endorses  in 
many  places  the  Old  Testament,  Marcion  expurgated  it. 
Of  the  Gospels,  he  took  only  that  of  Luke,  mutilated  to  suit 
his  scope.  Out  of  Paul's  Epistles,  he  constituted  the  Apos- 
tolic Book,  containing  the  Epistle  to  the  Galatians,  the  two 
Epistles  to  the  Corinthians,  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  the 
two  Epistles  to  the  Thessalonians,  the  Epistle  to  the  Ephe- 
sians  (called  by  him  the  Epistle  to  those  of  Laodicea),  the 
Epistle  to  the  Colossians,  the  Epistle  to  the  Philippians  and 
that  to  Philemon. 

"Et  super  haec,  id  quod  est  Evangelium  secundum  Lu- 
cam  circumcidens,  et  omnia  quae  sunt  de  generatione  Domini 
conscripta  auferens,  et*  de  doctrina  sermonum  Domini  multa 
auferens,  in  quibus  manifestissime  conditorem  hujus  uni- 
versitatis  suum  Patrem  confitens  Dominus  conscriptus  est; 
Semetipsum  esse  veraciorem  quam  sunt  hi  qui  Evangelium 

*The  Epistle  to  Diognetus  was  formerlj^  attributed  to  Justin  the 
Martyr.  Many  critics  reject  the  authorship,  but  a  conservative  opinion 
will  place  it  as  early  at  170, A.  D. 

fMarcion  was  bom  in  Sinope,  in  Pontus.  His  father  was  bishop  of 
that  city.  Marcion,  being  cut  off  from  the  Church  for  having  offered  vio- 
lence to  a  virgin,  came  to  Rome  between  the  years  140  and  165.  He  there 
became  attached  to  the  party  of  Cerdon,  the  heretic.  But  later  he 
extended  the  system  by  new  errors.  The  system  of  Marcion  has  this  in 
common  with  the  Manichean  heresy,  that  it  constitutes  two  principles, 
the  one  good  and  the  other  evil,  the  first  causes  of  everything.  According 
to  Marcion,  the  flesh  was  the  creation  of  the  evil  principle,  and  therefore. 
Christ  had  only  an  apparent  body. 


THE  CANON  OF  N.  T.  AND  THE  APOCRYPHA      559 

tradiderunt  Apostoli,  suasit  discipulis  suis;  non  Evangel- 
ium,  sed  particulam  Evangelii  tradens  eis.  Similiter  autem 
et  apostoli  Pauli  Epistolas  abscidit,  auferens  quaecumque 
manifeste  dicta  sunt  ab  Apostolo  de  eo  Deo  qui  mundum 
fecit,  quoniam  hie  Pater  Domini  nostri  Jesu  Christi,  et 
quaecumque  ex  propheticis  memorans  Apostolus  docuit, 
prsenuntiantibus  adventum  Domini."  (Tertullian,  Adv. 
Marc.  IV.    2.   P.    L.    2,    364.) 

Marcion  did  not  question  the  authenticity  of  the  books 
which  he  rejected.  He  simply  placed  his  theological  system 
above  Holy  Writ,  and  selected  only  those  books  which  by 
his  mutilation  could  be  made  to  conform  to  his  placita. 
Tertullian,  Irenasus,  and  others  of  that  age,  who  refuted 
Marcion,  always  fix  upon  him  the  charge  of  having  muti- 
lated the  Scriptures,  which  of  old  time  had  been  received  by 
the  Church.  This  is  valuable  to  us  in  establishing  that  before 
the  time  of  Marcion  the  written  deposit  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment included  many  more  books  than  he  accepted  in  his  list. 

The  opponents  of  the  Canon  of  the  New  Testament  some- 
time allege  that  those  who  received  and  used  the  books  of 
the  New  Testament  never  regarded  them  as  divine  Scrip- 
ture. This  is  sufficiently  disproven  by  the  data  already 
adduced.  A  certain  tendency  did  exist,  for  the  first  two 
centuries,  to  perpetuate  the  method  of  Christ  in  the  mode  of 
speaking  of  Scriptural  data.  Christ  speaks  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment as  the  Scriptures ;  of  his  Gospel,  as  the  living  reality. 
Now%  the  early  Christians,  while  extolling  the  data  of  the 
New  Law  above  that  of  the  Old,  often  reserved  the  name  of 
Scripture  for  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament,  considering 
the  books  of  the  New  Law  as  expressions  of  the  living  teach- 
ings, which  lived  after  Christ.  The  name  Scripture  seemed 
to  throw  it  too  far  back  into  antiquity.  Gradually,  how- 
ever, as  the  realization  of  the  actual  presence  of  Christ  and 
his  lieutenants  on  earth  passed  into  a  realization  of  a  past 
historical  fact  the  name  of  Scripture  was  universally  given 
to  the  books  of  the  New  Covenant. 

Another  objection  is  made,  that  many  apocryphal  books, 
at  first,  enjoyed  equal  favor  with  the  books  of  the  New 
Testament.     This  also  is  found  to  be  false.     Certain  ones 


660  THE    CANON    OF    N.    T.    OF    HIPPOLYTE 

which  contain  no  falsity,  and  were  written  with  good  intent, 
enjoyed  a  certain  favor  in  private  reading,  but  never  in  the 
official  usage  .  There  was  lacking  to  them  the  endorsement 
of  those  who  spoke  in  Christ's  name.  They  never  received 
the  approbation  of  an  Apostolic  Church.  Even  from  the 
first,  the  line  of  demarcation  between  them  and  the  Holy 
Scriptures,  is  fixed  and  clear.  Certainly  the  power  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  aided  in  keeping  the  Scriptural  deposit  clear  of 
the  vast  mass  of  Apocrypha,  which  came  into  being  at  that 
time.  The  causality  of  Divine  Providence  in  the  produc- 
tion and  preservation  of  the  Scriptures  is  such  that  no  man 
can  reason  rightly  of  them  without  taking  account  thereof. 

In  the  authentic  works  of  St.  Hippolyte,  are  found  quo- 
tations from  the  New  Testament  books.  His  manner  of 
quoting  leaves  no  doubt  that  he  spoke  of  them  as  Holy 
Scripture.  He  quotes  Math.  IV.  15,  16,  in  the  formula, 
"declarat  nobis  Evangelium."  (Fragmenta  in  Genesim) 
Ibidem,  he  says :  "For  the  Lord,  in  keeping  the  precepts  of 
the  Law,  did  not  abrogate  the  Law  and  the  Prophets,  but 
perfected  (them),  as  he  says  in  the  Gospels.''  The  plural 
number  proves  clearly  that  he  spoke  of  several  written 
Gospels. 

Again,  he  says:  "And  Nephthalim  is  taken  as  a  type  of 
our  affairs,  as  the  Gospels  teaches :  'Land  of  Zabulon  and 
land  of  Nephthalim,  the  w^ay  of  the  sea  across  the  Jordan,* 
and  that  which  follows.''  He  could  only  call  attention  to  that 
which  follows  in  a  written  text.  Excepting  the  Epistle  to 
Philemon,  he  employs  all  Paul's  Epistles  as  Holy  Scripture. 
In  loco  citato,  we  find  the  following:  "For  verily  the  only- 
begotten  Word  of  God,  being  God  of  God,  emptied  himself 
(eavTov  eKevcoaev)  according  to  the  Scriptures  .  .  .  and 
appeared  in  the  form  of  a  slave,  becoming  obedient  to  God 
the  Father,  even  to  death;  for  which  cause,  we  read  that  he 
is  henceforth  highly  exalted  .  .  .  and  hath  received  a  name 
above  every  other  name,  according  to  the  words  of  St.  Paul." 
This  is  a  paraphrase  on  the  Scripture  found  in  Paul's  Epistle 
to  the  Philippians,  II.  7-9. 


THE  CANON    OF    N.    T.    OF    ST.    THEOPHILUS  561 

St.  Hippolyte  defended  the  Apocalypse  of  St.  John  in  a 
special  work  against  Caius.* 

He  had  a  certain  predilection  for  the  Apocalypse,  and  the 
fourth  Gospel.  In  his  treatise  against  Noetus,  VII.,  he 
argues  as  follows:  "We  who  have  the  mind  of  the  Father 
believe  thus;  they  who  have  not,  deny  the  Son.  If  they 
say,  as  Philip  said,  questioning  concerning  the  Father: 
'Show  us  the  Father,  and  it  sufhceth  us;*  to  whom  the  Lord 
replied :  'Have  I  been  so  long  time  with  you,  and  hast  thou 
not  known  me,  Philip?  he  that  hath  seen  me,  hath  seen  the 
Father.  Believest  thou  not  that  I  am  in  the  Father,  and  the 
Father  in  me?'  and  if  they  dare  say  that  in  these  words 
their  dogma  is  confirmed  from  the  Lord's  confession,  that 
he  is  in  the  Father,  let  them  know  that  they  greatly  contra- 
dict themselves,  for  the  Scripture  confutes  them  and  con- 
victs them." 

The  greatest  part  of  Hippolyte 's  arguments  are  drawn 
from  the  New  Testament;  and  in  the  IX.  Chap,  against 
Noetus,  he  describes  his  sources:  "Just  as  one  who  would 
know  the  wisdom  of  the  world,  must  study  the  doctrines  of 
philosophers ;  thus  we,  who  would  have  the  religion  of  God, 
can  learn  not  elsewhere  than  in  the  Holy  Scriptures.  Let 
us  know,  therefore,  what  the  Holy  Scriptures  proclaim,  and 
let  us  study  what  they  teach." 

Hippolyte  refuted  Noetus  principally  from  the  Gospel 
and  Apocalypse  of  St.  John. 

St.  Theophilus,  who,  according  to  Jerome,  was  the  sixth 
bishop  of  Antioch,  and  who  governed  the  Church  of  Antioch 
from  1 68  to  i86,  has  a  clear  testimony  in  favor  of  the 
Gospels  and  Pauline  Epistles:  "Moreover,  concerning  the 
justice  which  the  Law  commands,  the  statements  of  the 
Prophets  and  the  Gospels  are  found  consonant  since  they  all 
spoke  in  the  inspiration  of  the  same  Spirit  of  God  . 
Regarding  chastity,  the  Holy  Scripture  teaches  us  not  only 
not  to  sin  in  deed,  but  also  not  in  thought  .   .   .  and  the 

*Catalogue  of  Ebed  Jesu,  c.  7(  ap.  Assemani,  Biblioth.  orient.  III.,  i 
15) :  "Sanctus  Hippolytus  martyr  et  episcopus  composuit.  .  .capita  adver- 
sus  Caium  et  apologiam  pro  Apocalypsi  et  Evangelio  Joannis  Apostoli  et 
Evangclist£E. " 

5R  (J^  c  ^ 


562  THE    CANON    OF    N.    T.    OF    MURATORI 

voice  of  the  Gospels,  commands  more  earnestly  of  chastity : 
'Whosoever  looketh  on  a  woman  to  lust  after  her,  hath  com- 
mitted adultery  with  her  already  in  his  heart  (Math.  V.  28) ; 
and  whosoever  shall  marry  her  that  is  divorced,  committeth 
adultery,  and  whosoever  putteth  away  his  wife,  saving  for 
the  cause  of  fornication,  causeth  her  to  commit  adultery.'  " 
(Ibid.  32.  Ad  Autolycum  III.  13.) 

Again  in  opere  citato,  14:  '  This  also  doth  the  Holy  Scrip- 
ture enjoin,  that  we  be  subject  to  magistrates  and  powers,  and 
pray  for  them,  that  we  may  lead  a  quiet  and  peaceful  life.  (I. 
Tim.  II.  2)  And  it  teaches  to  render  all  things  to  all  per- 
sons :  'Honor  to  whom  honor ;  fear  to  whom  fear ;  tribute  to 
whom  tribute ;  and  to  owe  no  man  anything,  but  to  love  one 
another.'  "     (Rom.  XIII.  7,  8). 

In  Book  II.  ad  Autolycum  22,  he  canonizes  the  fourth 
Gospel:  "These  things  the  Holy  Scriptures  teach  us,  and 
whosoever  were  inspired  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  among  whom  is 
John ,  saying  thus :  *In  the  beginning  was  the  Word,  and  the 
AYord  was  with  God.'  " 

According  to  Eusebius,  (Hist.  Eccles.  IV.  24)  Theo- 
philus  also  "composed  a  treatise  against  the  heresy  of  Her- 
mogenes,  in  which  he  makes  use  of  testimony  from  the  Apo- 
calypse of  John." 

We  come  now  to  examine  the  famous  document  com- 
monly known  as  the  Canon  of  Muratori.* 

This  document  was  discovered  by  Muratori  in  the  Ambro- 
sian   Library,  and  published  by  him  in  the  * ' Antiquitates 

*Louis  Antony  Muratori,  was  bom  at  Vignola,  in  the  province  of 
Modena,  on  the  2  ist  of  October,  1672.  He  was  highly  endowed  by  nature, 
and  received  a  liberal  education.  At  the  age  of  2 2,  he  was  called  to  Milan, 
by  Charles  Borromeo,  and  placed  over  the  Ambrosian  College,  and  the  vast 
Ambrosian  Library.  In  1 700  the  Duke  of  Modena  recalled  him  as  his  sub- 
ject, made  him  his  librarian,  and  placed  him  over  the  archives  of  his  duke- 
dom. He  was  undoubtedly  the  greatest  arch^ologist  of  his  age.  His 
friendship  was  sought  by  the  most  celebrated  savants  of  Italy  and  France. 
Academies  vied  with  each  other  for  his  patronage.  But  Muratori,  with 
that  deeper  wisdom  which  accompanies  true  learning,  shrank  from  all 
ostentation,  so  coveted  by  petty  minds. 

His  erudition  was  vast  and  varied.  At  times,  his  judgments  are 
defective,  even  in  matters  of  faith.  He  died  in  1750.  His  published 
works  fill  46  volumes  in  folio;  34  in  4to;  13,  in  8vo,  and  several  in  i2mo. 


THE    CANON    OF    N.    T.    OF   MURATORI  563 

Italicae,"  in  1740.  The  document  is  mutilated  at  the  begin- 
ning and  end.  It  is  written  in  barbarous  Latin.  Bleek, 
Wieseler,  Reuss  and  others  maintain  that  it  was  originally 
written  in  Latin.  Hilgenfeld,  Volckmar,  Zahn,  Light  foot, 
Comely,  Loisy  and  Muratori  himself  consider  it  a  transla- 
tion from  the  Greek.  Its  author  is  unknown.  Muratori 
conjectured  that  it  was  written  by  Caius,  a  priest  of  Rome, 
disciple  of  St.  Irenaeus;  Simon  de  Magistris  believes  Papias 
to  be  the  author ;  Bunsen  ascribes  it  to  Hegesippus ;  Light- 
foot  believes  it  to  be  the  work  of  Hippolyte. 

While  we  remain  in  uncertainty  as  to  its  author  and 
original  tongue,  we  may  not  doubt  that  the  document  is  a 
product  of  the  second  half  of  the  second  century.  This 
makes  it  of  first  importance  in  establishing  the  Canon  of 
Scripture  of  the  Church  of  Rome  in  that  age.  It  is  highly 
probable  that  its  original  language  was  Greek,  the  liturgical 
tongue  of  Rome  of  that  day. 

The  age  of  the  Codex  found  by  Muratori  is  not  more 
remote  than  the  eighth  century ;  and  the  barbarisms  seem 
to  have  originated  from  the  ignorance  and  negligence  of 
the  copyist. 

The  original  author  evidently  wished  to  draw  up  a 
canon  of  Scripture,  and  distinguish  the  genuine  from  the 
apocryphal  books.  We  here  produce  the  document  after 
the  facsimile  published  by  Tregelles  at  Oxford,  in  1867.  It 
is  not  our  intention  to  enter  into  the  world  of  conjecture 
which  has  been  created  by  the  learned  interpreters  of  this 
document.  It  suffices  us  to  show  only  its  import  in  its 
relation  to  the  New  Testament  Canon, 
quibus  tamen  Interfuit  et  ita  posuit.* 

Tertio    [tertium]    Evangelii    librum    secundo    [secundum] 
Lucanf 


*It  seems  to  me  vain  to  conjecture  what  was  contained  in  the  mutilated 
beginning.  It  is  certain  that  it  must  have  related  to  the  Gospels  of  Mat- 
thew and  Mark.  The  very  fact  that  the  Gospel  of  Luke  is  called  the  third 
leaves  no  room  to  doubt  that  the  first  and  second,  which  must  have  pre- 
ceded, were  the  Gospels  of  Matthew  and  Mark.  We  see  in  the  document 
evidences  of  the  transition  from  low  Latin  to  Italian  in  the  placing  of 
"tertio"  for  "tertium,"  "secundo"  for  "secundum,"  etc. 

fNotwithstanding  all  the  barbarisms  of  the  next  seven  lines,  these  data 
result  clearly  from  them:    That  Luke  is  the  author  of  the  third  Gospel; 


564  THE   CANON   OF   N.    T.    OF   MURATORI 

Lucas  Iste  medicus  post  acensum  [ascensum]  XPI, 
Cum  eo  [eum]  Paulus  quasi  ut  iuris  studiosum 
Secundum  adsumsisset,  numeni  [nomine]  suo 
ex  opinione  concribset  [conscripsit] ;  dnm  tamen  nee  Ipse 
dvidit  [vidit]  in  came,  et  ide  prout  asequi  [assequi]  potuit ; 
ita  et  ad  [ab]  nativitate  lohannis  incipet  [incipit]  dicere. 
Quarti  Evangeliorum  lohannis  ex  decipolis  [discipulis]* 
Cohortantibus  condescipulis  et  eps  [episcopis]  suis 
dixit:  conieiunate  mihi  odie  [hodie]  triduo  [triduum],  et 
quid  cuique  fuerit  revelatum,  alterutrum 
nobis  enarremus.     Eadem  nocte  reve- 
latum andrese  ex  apostolis,  ut  recognis- 
centibus  [recognoscentibus]  cuntis  [cunctis]  lohannis  [loan- 

nes]  suo  nomine 
cimta  [cuncta]  discribret  [describeret]  et  ideo  hcit    [Ucet] 

variaf 
sinculis  [singulis]  evangeliorum  libris  principia 
doceantur,  Nihil  tamen  differt  creden- 

that  the  physician  Luke  wrote  it  after  the  Ascension  of  Our  Lord;  that 
Luke  was  a  companion  and  pupil  (juris  studiosus)  of  St.  Paul;  that  Luke 
wrote  the  Gospel  in  his  own  name,  though  from  Paul's  data  (ex  opinione) ; 
that  Luke  had  not  seen  the  Lord  in  the  flesh,  and  wrote  after  diligent 
research  (prout  assequi  potuit) ;  and  that  he  began  his  Gospel  with  the 
Nativity  of  John  the  Baptist.  This  is  the  exact  history  of  the  third 
Gospel. 


*Zahn  is  of  the  opinion  that  the  legend  contained  in  the  lines  from  the 
tenth  to  fifteenth  inclusively,  comes  from  the  Acta  Apocrypha  of  St.  John. 
There  may  be  a  grain  of  truth  in  it,  as  Clement  of  Alexandria,  Eusebius 
and  St.  Jerome  testify  that  John  wrote  his  Gospel  at  the  request  of  the 
bishops  of  Asia.  John  certainly  received  by  direct  revelation  the  doctrine 
of  the  eternal  generation  of  the  Word.  But  the  legend  was  the  author's 
explanation  of  a  fact,  and  the  fact  was  that  the  Gospel  of  St.  John  was  in 
the  deposit  of  the  Church  of  Rome,  at  the  time  of  his  writing.  Thus  we 
have  a  clear  testimony  for  the  four  Gospels. 


f From  the  sixteenth  to  the  twentj^-sixth  line  inclusively,  the  author 
explains  that  although  every  Evangelist  has  a  different  point  of  departure 
(varia  principia)  they  all  are  moved  by  the  same  grand  motive,  and  all 
conspire  to  build  up  the  fulness  of  the  message.  Every  one  has  his  own 
plan,  and  something  proper  to  himself,  but  one  completes  the  other,  and 
one  Gospel  exists  in  four  books,  the  work  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 


THE    CANON    OF    N.    T.    OF    MURATORI  565 

tium  fidei,  cum  uno  ac  principali  spu  [Spiritu]  de-* 

clarata  sint  in  omnibus  omnia,  de  nativi- 

tate,  de  passione,  de  resurrectione, 

de  conversatione  cum  decipulis  [discipulis]  suis, 

ac  de  gemino  eius  ad  vent  o  [ad  vent  u], 

Primo  In  humilitate  dispectus  [despectus],  quod  fo- 

tu  [fuit],  secundum  potest  ate  regali  pre- 

clarum  quod  foturum  [futurum]  est.     quid  ergof 

mirum,  si  lohannes  tarn  constanter 

sincula  [singula]  etia  In  epistulis  suis  proferat 

dicens  in  semeipsu  [semetipsum] :     Quas  vidimus  oculis 

nostris  et  auribus  audivimus  et  manus 

nostra  palpaverunt,  haec  scripsimus  vobis; 

vSic  enim  non  solum  visurem  [visorem],  sed  et  audit orem, 

sed  et  scriptore  omnium  mirabiliu  dni  [Domini]  per  ordi- 

nem  profetetur  [profitetur].     Acta  aute  omniu  apostolorumt 

*The  designation  of  the  Holy  Ghost  as  "principalis"  is  also  used  in  the 
LI.  (Vulg.  L.)  Psalm. 


tThe  passage  included  between  the  last  words  of  the  twenty-sixth 
line  and  first  half  of  the  thirty-fourth  establishes  that  John  wrote  more 
than  one  Epistle  (in  Epistolis,  plural  number) :  that  he  wrote  from  per- 
sonal experience  (in  semetipsum) :  and  that  the  first  Epistle  of  John  is 
one  of  the  epistolce,  for  its  opening  sentence  is  literally  quoted.  Later 
data  of  the  document  leave  no  doubt  that  its  author  included  the  three 
Epistles  of  John  in  his  Canon. 


JThe  passage  from  the  second  half  of  the  thirty-fourth  line  down  to  the 
close  of  the  period  in  the  thirty-ninth,  clearly  establishes  the  canonicity 
of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles.  It  seems  to  be  the  mind  of  the  author,  that 
excepting  the  martyrdom  of  Peter  (Semota  passione  Petri)  Luke  wrote 
down  the  acts  which  he  had  personally  witnessed.  The  closing  words  of 
the  period  are  most  difficult  and  have  received  many  interpretations. 
Comely  believes  that  the  author  speaks  of  the  journey  of  Paul  from  Rome 
to  Spain,  which,  like  the  martyrdom  of  Peter,  has  been  omitted  by  him. 
Comely  corrects  the  reading  as  follows:  Sed  et  profectioncm  Pauli  ab 
urbe,  Spaniam  proficiscentis. "  Thus  it  would  become  a  testimony  of  the 
second  century  of  the  voyage  of  Paul  to  Spain.  We  can  not  receive  this 
conjecture  of  Comely.  The  writer  of  Muratori's  Canon,  is  there  describing 
what  Luke  wrote.  Now,  nowhere  does  Luke  give  us  the  departure  of 
Paul  from  Rome  for  Spain.  I  would  venture  the  correction:  Sed  et  pro- 
fectioncm Pauli  ad  urbem  (Romam)  ad  Spaniam  proficiscentis.  "The 
voyage  to  Rome  of  Paul,  who  had  set  out  for  Spain."  Now,  Luke  did 
write  the  account  of  Paul's  journey  to  Rome,  who  had  in  a  general  way  set 
out  for  Spain. 


566  THE  CANON   OF   N.    T.    OF   MURATORI 

sub  uno  libro  scribta  [scripta]  sunt,  Lucas  obtime  theofi- 
le  comprindit  [comprehendit],  quia  sub  praesentia  eius  sing- 
ula 

When  Paul  wrote  to  the  Romans  of  his  contemplated  visit  to  them  he 
had  in  mind  to  go  from  them  into  Spain :  "When  therefore  I  have  accom- 
plished this,  and  have  sealed  to  them  this  fruit,  I  will  go  on  by  you  tmto 
Spain."  (Rom.  XV.  28.)  Though  Paul  came  to  Rome  not  in  the  manner 
which  he  had  contemplated  when  he  wrote  to  the  Romans,  but  as  a 
prisoner,  nevertheless  the  writer  of  the  Muratorian  fragment  connects 
Paul's  wish  to  visit  Spain  with  his  coming  to  Rome. 

There  is  no  doubt  that  Paul  had  in  mind  to  visit  Spain,  but  we  are 
persuaded  that  this  ptu-pose  was  not  fulfilled.  There  is  no  trace  of  Paul's 
visit  to  Spain  in  any  ancient  document,  nor  in  the  traditions  of  Spain. 

When  Paul  left  Miletus  for  his  last  journey  to  Jerusalem,  he  was 
moved  by  the  Holy  Spirit  to  declare:  "And  now,  behold,  I  go  bound  in 
the  spirit  imto  Jerusalem  not  knowing  the  things  that  shall  befall  me 
there:  save  that  the  Holy  Ghost  testifieth  unto  me  in  every  city,  saying 
that  bonds  and  afflictions  abide  me.  But  I  hold  not  my  life  of  any  account 
as  dear  to  myself,  so  that  I  may  accomplish  my  course,  and  the  ministry 
which  I  received  from  the  Lord  Jesus,  to  testify  the  gospel  of  the  grace 
ofGod."     (Acts.  XX.  22-25). 

Those  who  believe  that  Paul  was  freed  from  his  first  Roman  imprison- 
ment are  forced  to  entertain  the  opinion  that  Paul  here  gave  expression 
to  an  erroneous  impression.  The  context  however  does  not  permit  such 
view  for  it  clearly  manifests  a  testimony  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  Paul  clearly 
spake  the  aforesaid  words  in  a  spirit  of  prophecy,  and  the  faithful  of 
Miletus  accepted  them  as  such. 

The  evidence  seems  to  warrant  that  Paul  never  left  Rome  again 
after  being  brought  there  a  prisoner.  In  the  abrupt  close  of  Acts,  Luke 
simply  tells  us  that  Paul  was  allowed  to  live  in  his  own  house  at  Rome, 
under  military  surveillance,  and  that  he  taught  all  that  came  to  him  for 
two  years.  The  rest  of  his  life  is  hidden.  The  date  of  his  martyrdom 
is  imcertain.  St.  Jerome  (De  Vir.  111.  5)  places  St.  Paul's  death  in  the 
fourteenth  year  of  Nero,  which  is  generally  accepted  to  correspond  with 
the  year  67  A.  D. 

Some  endeavor  to  prove  that  Paul  was  freed  from  his  first  imprison- 
ment, and  again  visited  the  East,  from  II.  Philipp.  II.  24,  where  in  com- 
mending his  messenger  Timothy  to  the  Philippians  Paul  declares :  ' ' — but 
I  trust  in  the  Lord  that  I  myself  also  shall  come  shortly.' ' 

Of  a  like  tenor  is  his  declaration  to  Philemon,  22;  "But  withal 
prepare  me  also  a  lodging:  for  I  hope  that  through  your  prayers,  I  shall 
be  granted  unto  you.' ' 

These  statements  written  in  his  imprisonment  at  Rome  are  not  of 
the  positive  tenor  of  the  statement  made  to  the  Christians  of  Miletus. 
Neither  do  they  conflict  with  it ;  for  Paul  could  have  visited  the  Church 
of  Philippi  and  Philemon  at  Colossas  without  revisiting  Miletus. 

Hence  Paul  may  have  entertained  a  hope  of  freedom  at  this  time; 
which  hope  seems  not  to  have  been  realized.  To  the  Christians  of  Miletus 
Paul  expresses  a  prophecy;  to  the  Philippians  and  to  Philemon,  he 
expresses  a  mere  human  hope. 


THE   CANON   OF   N.    T.    OF   MURATORI  567 

gerebantur,  sicut  et  semote  passione  Petri 
evidenter  declarat,  Sed  et  profectionem  pauli  ad  ur- 
bes  [urbem]  ad  spania  proficescentis.     Epistulae  autem* 
Pauli,  quae,  a  quo  loco,  vel  qua  ex  causa  directe  [directae] 
sint,  volentatibus  [volentibus]  intellegere  Ipse  [ipsae]  decla- 
rant. 
Primu  omnium  corintheis  scysmae  [schisma]  hasresis  In- 
terdicens,  deinceps  B  callatis  [Galatis]  circumcisione, 
Romanis  autem  omidine  [ordinem]  scripturarum  sed  et 
principium  earum  esse  XPM  Intimans, 
prolexius  [prolixius]  scripsit,   de  quibus  sincolis  [singulis] 
necesse  est  [a]  nobis  desputari.     Cum  ipse  beatus 
apostolus  Paulus  sequens  prodecessoris  [praedecessoris]  sui 
lohannis    ordine    nonnisi    comenati    [nominatim]    semptae 
[septem]  eccleses  [ecclesiis]  scribat,  ordine  tali:  a  [ad]coren- 

thios 
prima;  ad  efesios  seconda,  ad  philippinses  ter- 
tia,  ad  colosensis  quarta,  ad  calatas  [Galatas]  quin- 
ta,  ad  tensaolenecinsis  [Thessalonicenses]  sexta,  ad  romanos 

*The  passage  from  the  close  of  the  thirty-ninth  line  down  to  the  close 
of  the  period  in  the  sixty- third,  establishes  the  canonicity  of  all  the 
Epistles  of  Paul  except  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews.  According  to  the 
author's  method  of  computation,  Paul,  after  the  manner  of  John  in  the 
Apocalypse  wrote  letters  to  seven  churches,  in  this  order:  Corinthians, 
Ephesians,  Philippians,  Colossians.  Galatians,  Thessalonians,  and  Romans. 
Two  of  these  are  repeated :  that  to  the  Corinthians,  and  that  to  the  Thes- 
salonians. From  the  fifty-fourth  line  to  the  middle  of  the  fifty-ninth  the 
construction  is  very  involved,  and  the  text,  perhaps,  corrupt;  but  the 
sense  is  evidently  that,  though  Paul  and  John  wrote  to  seven  different 
individual  churches,  the  Catholic  Church  was  one  and  the  same  through- 
out the  whole  world.  The  thought  is  too  plain  to  need  our  commentary. 
In  terming  John  the  predecessor  of  Paul,  the  author  refers  to  the  date  of 
John's  calling  to  the  Apostolate,  not  to  the  date  of  the  writing  of  the 
Apocalypse.  The  list  of  Paul's  Epistles  closes  with  the  Epistle  to  Phile- 
mon, that  to  Titus,  and  the  two  to  Timothy,  whose  pastoral  scope  (in 
ordinationem  ecclesiasticaj  disciplinae)  is  clearly  signified.  This  is  the 
first  clear  testimony  that  we  have  for  the  Epistle  to  Philemon.  It  is  not 
strange  that  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  finds  no  place  therein.  St.  Clem- 
ent of  Rome  had  used  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  as  Holy  Scripture. 
But  after  the  rise  of  the  Novatian  heresy,  which  denied  forgiveness  to 
certain  sins,  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  which  seemed  to  favor  that  heresy, 
was  omitted  in  the  ptiblic  use  of  the  Church  of  Rome,  and  was  rarely 
employed  by  any  writer  diu-ing  the  second  and  third  century.  It  was  not 
rejected,  but  simply  passed  over  in  a  sort  of  religious  silence. 


568  THE    CANON    OF    N.    T.    OF   MURATORI 

septima,  Verum  corintheis  et  thessaolecen- 

sibus,  licet  pro  cerrebtione  [correptione]  Iteretur,  una 

tamen  per  omnem  orbem  terras  ecclesia 

deffusa  [diffusa]  esse  denoscitur  [dignoscitur] ;  Et  lohannis 

[loannes]  eni 
In  apocalebsy  [Apocalypsi]  licet  septe  eccleseis  scribat, 
tamen  omnibus  dicit.     Veru  ad  filemonem  una; 
et  ad  titu  una,  et  ad  tymotheu  duas  [duae]  pro  affec- 
to  et  dilectione,  In  honore  [honorem]  tamen  ecclesise  ca- 
tholice  [catholicas],  in  ordinationem  ecclesiastice  [ecclesiasticas] 
descepline  [disciplinae]  scificate  [sanctificat^e]  sunt.     Fertur 

etiam  ad* 
Laudecenses  [Laodicenses],  alia  ad  alexandrinos  Pauli  no- 
mine fincte  [fictae]  ad  heresem  Marcionis,  et  alia  plu- 
ra,  quae  in  catholicam  ecclesiam  recepi  [recipi]  non 
potest :   Pel  enim  cum  melle  misceri  non  con- 
cruit  [congruit].     epistola  sane  lude  [luda^]  et  superscriptio 

[suprascriptijt 

*In  the  period  extending  from  sixty-third  to  sixty-eighth  line,  the  author 
rejects  the  supposititious  letters  to  the  Laodiceans,  and  to  the  Alexan- 
drians. In  the  Apocryphal  letter  to  the  Laodiceans,  there  is  nothing  favor- 
able to  Marcionism,  hence,  we  believe  that  he  spoke  of  that  heresy  only  in 
relation  to  the  lost  letter  to  the  Alexandrians.  Some  have  without  reason, 
believed  that  by  the  letter  to  the  Alexandrians  Paul  meant  the  Epistle  to 
Hebrews.  This  is  plainly  unfounded,  as  Hebrews  was  never  known  in 
antiquity  by  that  name,  and  a  catalogue  of  the  Church  of  Rome  could 
not  assign  it  such  a  place. 

tin  the  sixty-eighth  line  the  Epistle  of  St.  Jude  is  canonized.  The 
sense  of  the  statement  concerning  St.  John  is  obscure.  We  advance  a  prob- 
able explanation  of  it.  The  author  may  have  considered  the  preced- 
ing notice  of  lines  26-34  sufficient  for  the  first  Epistle,  and  may  here  re- 
ceive the  two  remaining  ones  among  the  Catholic  Epistles  (in  Catholica) . 
This  conjecture  is  more  probable  since  the  fate  of  the  Second  and  Third 
Epistles  of  John  was  always  the  same.  Whoever  received  one  received 
the  other.  It  seems  to  have  been  the  usage  of  those  times  to  speak  of  the 
Second  and  Third  Epistle  of  St.  John  apart  from  the  first,  since  John 's  au- 
thorship of  them  was  not  by  all  acknowledged.  Hence  the  author  follows 
the  usage  of  his  time  in  classing  them  by  themselves,  while  he  at  the  same 
time  maintains  their  authenticity.  Another  conjecture  endorsed  by  many 
is  that  the  author  is  of  the  opinion  mentioned  by  Jerome,  "that  the  Sec- 
ond and  Third  Epistles  are  not  of  John  the  Evangelist,  but  of  another  John, 
a  priest  whose  sepulchre  is  shown  at  Ephesus. ' '  This  seems  to  us  errone- 
ous, from  the  suprascripti  of  the  document,  evidently  referring  these 
Epistles  to  the  Evangelist      The  advocates  of  this  second  opinion  change 


THE    CANON    OF    N.    T.    OF   MURATORI  569 

lohannis  duas  [duae]  In  catholica  habentur.     Et  sapi- 

entia  ab  amicis  Salomonis  in  honore  ipsius 

scripta.     apocalapse  [apocalypsim  vel  apocalypses]   etiam 

lohannis  et  Pe-* 
tri  tantum  recipimus,  quam  quidam  ex  nos- 
tris  legi  In  ecclesia  nolunt.     Pastorem  verof 
nuperrim  et  [nuperrime]  temporibus  nostris  In  urbe 
roma  herma  conscripsit,  sedente  [in]  cathe- 
tra  [cathedra]  urbis  romae  ecclesiag  Pio  eps   f rater  [episcopo, 

fratre] 
eius;  et  ideo  legi  eum  quidem  Oportet,  se  pu- 

plicare  [publicare]  vero  in  eclesia  populo  Neque  inter 

I 

the  "ef  preceding  "Sapientia"  to  "tit' ',  and  believe  the  sense  to  be  that 
the  author  likens  these  two  Epistles  to  the  Book  of  Wisdom,  inasmuch  as 
they  bear  John's  name,  though  not  written  by  him.  This  seems  to  me 
gratuitous  and  far-fetched.  Loisy  rightly  rejects  it,  and  maintains  that 
the  presence  of  Wisdom  here  is  due  to  its  late  origin,  so  that  by  some  it 
was  considered  to  belong  more  properly  to  the  New  than  to  the  Old 
Testament. 


*The  period  comprised  between  the  seventy-first  and  seventy-third 
line  contains  a  clear  approbation  of  the  Apocalypse  of  St.  John,  but  the 
rest  of  its  import  is  obscure.  The  most  obvious  sense  is  that  with  the 
Apocalypse  of  John,  which  all  received,  was  an  Apocalypse  of  Peter  to 
which  the  author  was  favorably  inclined,  although  it  was  controverted  in 
the  Church  of  Rome.  Others  believe  the  text  to  be  corrupt,  and  that  the 
genuine  text  contained  mention  of  the  Epistles  of  St.  Peter.  Zahn  re- 
stores the  text  thus:  "Apocalypsin  etiam  Johannis  et  Petri  unam  tantum 
recipimus  epistolam :  fertur  etiam  altera  quam  quidem  ex  nostris  legi  In 
Ecclesia  volunt.  "  The  conjecture  is  ingenious,  but  must  remain  in  the 
realm  of  conjecture.  I  am  the  more  inclined  to  hold  with  Cornely,  that 
the  author  spoke  of  the  Epistles  of  Peter  in  the  mutilated  beginning, 
where  he  treated  of  Mark's  Gospel.  In  its  present  state,  the  document 
can  not  be  considered  a  proof  for  the  existence  of  St.  Peter's  Epistles, 
neither  is  their  omission  from  the  mutilated  exemplar  an  argument  against 
them.     We  must  seek  other  data  for  their  canonicity. 


fPastor  receives  its  true  place,  a  pious  book,  read  in  the  churches,  but 
not  considered  Holy  Scripture.  There  is  also  in  these  lines  an  indication 
of  the  date  of  the  document.  He  says  Pastor  was  written  recently,  in  our 
times,  by  Hermas,  while  his  brother  Pius  occupied  the  episcopal  chair. 
Now,  St.  Pius  reigned  from  142  to  151  or  156,  To  justif}^  the  author's  ex- 
pression it  could  not  have  been  long  after  this  epoch  that  the  document  was 
written;  hence,  Cornely  rightly  infers  that  it  should  not  be  placed  later 
than  the  year  170.  The  close  of  the  document  is  obscure;  but,  since  it 
bears  no  relation  to  the  Canon  of  Scripture,  we  pass  it  over  in   silence. 


570  THE    CANON   OF   N.    T.    OF   MURATORI 

profetas    [prophetarum]    completum    numero    [numerum] 

neque  Inter 
apostolos  In  fine  temporum  potest. 
Arsinoi  autem  seu  valentini,  vel  miltiadis 
nihil  In  totum  recipemus  [recipimus].     Qui  etiam  novu 
psalmorum  libnim  marcioni  conscripse- 
runt  una  cum  basilide  assianum  catafry- 
cum  const  it  utorem. 

The  Epistle  of  St.  James  finds  no  place  in  the  document. 
That  Epistle  had  been  used  as  divine  Scripture  by  the  author 
of  Pastor,  but  doubts  remained  in  some  minds  concerning  it. 
Thus,  Eusebius  (Hist.  Eccles.  11.  23)  speaks  concerning  it: 

"These  accounts  are  given  respecting  James,  who  is  said 
to  have  written  the  first  of  the  Epistles  general,  (catholic) ; 
but  it  is  to  be  observed  that  it  is  considered  spurious.  Not 
many  indeed  of  the  ancients  have  mentioned  it,  and  not  even 
that  called  the  Epistle  of  Jude,  which  is  also  one  of  the  seven 
called  catholic  Epistles.  Nevertheless  we  know,  that  these, 
with  the  rest,  are  publicly  used  in  most  of  the  churches." 

Funk  (Patres  Apost.)  found  eight  references  to  St. 
James'  Epistle  in  the  I.  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians  of  Clement 
of  Rome.  He  found  five  references  in  the  II.  Cor.  by  some 
attributed  to  the  same  author;  and  six  references  in  Clem- 
ent's Epistles  to  Virgins.  References  are  also  found  in 
Justin  and  Irenseus.  It  is  not  clear  whether  certain  pas- 
sages in  the  works  of  Clement  of  Alexandria  were  taken  from 
James'  Epistle  or  from  the  Gospels.  Origen  is  the  first 
among  the  Fathers  who  quoted  the  work  as  Holy  Scripture 
imder  the  name  of  James  the  iVpostle. 

One  of  the  strongest  proofs  of  its  early  approbation  by  the 
Church  is  its  presence,  under  its  proper  name,  in  the  Pe- 
shitto,  which  dates  from  early  times. 

We  here  compare  two  passages  from  the  Pastor  of  Her- 
mas  with  the  Epistle  of  St.  James,  having  in  mind  to  prove 
that  he  drew  material  from  the  same  Epistle. 

St.  Jas.  V.  4.  Pastor,  Lib.  I.  Vis.  III.  9. 

"Ecce,  merces  operariorum,  "Videte  ergo  vos,  qui  gloria- 

qui   messuerunt   regiones   ves-      mini  in  divitiis,  ne  forte  inge- 


THE    CANON    OF    N.    T.    OF   IRENAEUS  571 

tras,  quae  fraudata  est  a  vobis,  miscant  ii  qui  egent,  et  gemitus 
clamat ;  et  clamor  eorum  in  au-  eorum  ascendat  ad  Dom- 
res  Domini  Sabaothiiitroivit. ' '      inum — . ' ' 

Jas.  IV.  7.  Pastor,  Lib.  II.  Mand.  XII.  5 . 

"Subditi  ergo  estote  Deo:  re-  " — Potest    autem    diabolus 

sistite  autem  diabolo,  et  fugiet  luctari,  sed  vincere  non  potest, 
a  vobis. ' '  Si  enim  resistitis    illi,  fugiet  a 

vobis  confusus. ' ' 

Toward  the  close,  therefore,  of  the  second  century  the 
Canon  of  the  New  Testament  in  the  Church  of  Rome  con- 
tained all  the  books  of  the  Catholic  Canon,  excepting  the 
Epistle  of  St.  James,  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  and  prob- 
ably the  Second  Epistle  of  St.  Peter. 

The  Canon  of  the  Church  of  Gaul  of  the  same  age  is 
sought  in  the  works  of  Irenseus. 

A  splendid  testimony  for  the  four  Gospels  is  found  in  the 
Third  Book  of  his  Treatise  against  Heresy,  XL  7,  8:  ''So 
great  is  the  certitude  of  the  Gospels  that  the  heretics  them- 
selves render  testimony  to  them,  and  every  heretic  that 
comes  forth  strives  to  prove  his  doctrine  from  them.  For 
the  Ebionites,  who  use  only  the  Gospel  of  Matthew,  are  con- 
futed by  it,  that  their  presumption  concerning  the  Lord  is 
not  well  founded.  Marcion,  who  mutilates  St.  Luke,  by 
that  which  he  retains  of  it,  is  shown  to  be  a  blasphemer  against 
the  Lord.  Those  who  separate  Jesus  from  Christ,  and  who, 
selecting  the  Gospel  of  Mark,  say  that  Christ  remained 
impassible,  and  that  Jesus  suffered,  if  they  read  it  with  the 
love  of  truth  can  be  corrected  of  their  error.  The  Valen- 
tinians,  who  exclusively  use  the  Gospel  of  John  for  the  osten- 
tation of  their  unions,  are  by  it  shown  to  be  false  in  every- 
thing, as  we  have  shown  in  the  first  book.  Since,  therefore, 
our  opponents  render  testimony  for  us,  and  use  these  (Gos- 
pels) ,  our  demonstration  regarding  them  is  shown  to  be  true 
and  firm.  For  the  Church  receives  neither  more  in  number 
nor  fewer  in  number  than  these  Gospels.  For  of  the  world 
in  which  we  live,  there  are  four  great  regions ;  and  there  are 
four  principal  winds;  and  the  Church  is  spread  over  the 
whole  earth;  and  the  pillar  and  ground  of  the  Church  (I. 


572  THE  CANON  OF  N.  T.  OF  IRENAEUS 

Tim.  III.  15)  is  the  Gospel,  and  the  spirit  of  life;  therefore 
it  follows  that  the  Church  has  four  columns  blowing  forth  in 
all  directions  incorruption,  and  vivifying  men.  From  which 
it  is  manifest  that  the  divine  Architect  of  all  things,  the  Word 
who  is  borne  upon  the  Cherubim,  and  rules  all  things,  who 
was  made  manifest  to  men,  gave  us  the  fourfold  Gospel, 
which  is  actuated  by  one  Spirit."  Continuing,  he  applies 
the  vision  of  Ezekiel  to  the  four  E^^angelists,  which  inter- 
pretation has  continued  in  the  Church  since  that  time.  The 
conclusion  of  Irenaeus  is  better  than  his  reasoning.  His 
mysticism  avails  naught,  but  his  conclusion  is  independent 
of  it.  The  conclusion  was  the  faith  of  the  Church  of  his 
time,  which  he  strove  to  illustrate.  We  could  add  nothing 
to  this  testimony  by  adducing  the  numberless  quotations  of 
the  Gospels  in  the  works  of  Irenaeus.  It  is  sufficient  in 
itself  to  establish  the  status  of  the  Gospels  in  the  Church  of 
Gaul  of  the  second  century.  Irenaeus  was  a  disciple  of  the 
disciples  of  St.  John.  The  voice  of  Apostolic  times  is  per- 
petuated by  them  to  him.  He  speaks  in  the  tone  of  a  man 
who  was  sure  of  his  point,  knowing  that  he  had  back  of  him 
the  faith  of  the  Catholic  Church.  The  Church  from  the 
Apostolic  times  received  four  Gospels,  and  only  four.  Iren- 
cEus  wrote,  in  the  twelfth,  thirteenth,  and  fourteenth  chap- 
ters of  this  same  third  book,  a  commentary  on  the  Acts  of 
the  Apostles.  In  the  beginning  of  the  fourteenth  chapter, 
he  vindicates  their  authorship  to  St.  Luke. 

No  mention  is  found  in  Irenaeus  of  the  Epistle  to  Phile- 
mon, but  this  fact  is  not  strange,  considering  that  the  nature 
of  the  book  did  not  bring  it  within  the  scope  of  his  writing. 
Eusebius  testifies  (Hist.  Eccles.  V.  26)  that  Irenaeus,  in  a 
book  of  various  disputes,  quoted  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews. 
In  Lib.  II.  contra  Haer.  XXX.  9,  he  uses  the  phrase :  "Deus 
omnia  fecit  verbo  vtrtutis  smc'' ;  the  form  of  expression,  so 
eminently  Pauline,  is  evidently  taken  from  Hebrews  I.  3. 

All  the  other  Epistles  of  St.  Paul  are  used  with  equal  fre- 
quency with  the  Gospels.  All  the  works  of  Irenaeus  are 
rich  in  quotations  from  them.  Paul's  pastoral  Epistles  are 
received  with  equal  favor  with  the  others.  He  begins  his 
great  work  against  the  heresies  with  a  quotation  from  Tim- 


THE  CANON  OF  N.  T.  OF  IRENAEUS  573 

othy,  I.  4.  In  Lib.  II.  XIV.  i,  he  says:  "And  Paul  him- 
self has  manifested  in  his  Epistles,  saying:  Demas  has  left 
me,  and  gone  to  Thessalonica ;  Crescens,  into  Galatia;  only 
Luke  is  with  me."  (II.  Tim.  IV.  to,  ii).  In  op.  cit.  Lib. 
IV.  XVI.  5,  he  quotes  the  first  Epistle  of  St.  Peter:  *'And 
for  this  cause,  Peter  says:  That  we  have  not  liberty  for  a 
cloak  of  maliciousness."     I.  Pet.  II.  i6. 

In  op.  cit.  Lib.  V.  XXIII.  2,  he  has  the  following  allu- 
sion to  the  Second  Epistle  of  St.  Peter :  "Certain  ones  place 
the  death  of  Adam  in  the  thousandth  year,  for  a  day  with  the 
Lord  is  as  a  thousand  years.''  Loisy  believes  that  Irenaeus 
here  draws  from  Psalm  XC.  (Vulg.  LXXXIX.) ;  but  the 
phraseology  and  the  context  plainly  point  to  II.  Peter, 
III.  8:  "But,  beloved,  be  not  ignorant  of  one  thing  that 
one  day  is  with  the  Lord  as  a  thousand  years." 

Again  in  op.  cit.  Lib.  IV.  XIII.  and  XVI.  Irenasus  speaks 
of  Abraham  as  the  friend  of  God.  In  the  latter  place,  he 
quotes  the  passage :  "Credidit  Deo,  et  reputatum  est  illi  ad 
justitiam,  et  amicus  Dei  vocatus  est."  Now,  although  the 
first  part  of  the  expression  is  found  in  Genesis,  XV.  6,  and  in 
the  Epistles  of  Paul,  the  whole  expression  is  found  only  in 
James  II.  23. 

In  Lib.  V.  I.  I,  Irenasus  calls  the  Christians,  "the  first 
fruits  of  his  (God's)  creatures,"  which  peculiar  expression  is 
only  found  in  James  I.  18. 

No  mention  is  found  in  the  works  of  Irenasus  of  the 
Epistle  of  Jude.  But  I  believe  with  Loisy  that  it  was  in  the 
collection  of  the  Church  of  Gaul  at  the  time.  The  Canon  of 
Muratori  shows  us  that  it  had  a  secure  place  in  the  Canon  of 
Rome,  and  the  Church  of  Gaul  was  in  strict  conformity  with 
Rome. 

St.  Irenaeus  directly  quotes  from  the  First  and  Second 
Epistles  of  St.  John. 

In  op.  cit.  Lib.  III.  5,  he  writes :  "Wherefore,  also  in  his 
Epistle,  he  (John)  has  testified  to  us:  "Little  children,  it  is 
the  last  hour :  and  as  you  have  heard  that  antichrist  cometh : 
even  now  there  are  many  antichrists :  whereby  we  know  that 
it  is  the  last  hour." — I.  Jo.  II.  18. 


574  THE  CANON  OF  N.  T.  OF  IRENAEUS 

A  little  farther  on  in  the  same  work  in  Paragraph  8, 
he  has  this  testimony :  '  'And  these  are  the  ones  whom  the 
Lord  bade  us  avoid,  and  also  his  disciple  John  in  the  afore- 
said Epistle,  bade  us  fly  from  them  saying :  'Many  seducers 
are  entered  into  the  world,  who  confess  not  that  Jesus  Christ, 
is  come  in  the  flesh.  This  is  a  seducer  and  is  antichrist. 
Look  to  yourselves,  that  ye  lose  not  those  things  which  ye 
have  wrought.'  And  again  in  his  Epistle  he  says :  'Dearly 
beloved,  believe  not  every  spirit,  but  try  the  spirits  whether 
they  be  of  God ;  because  many  false  prophets  are  gone  out 
into  the  world. 

By  this  is  the  spirit  of  God  known :  every  spirit  which  con- 
fesseth  Jesus  Christ  to  have  come  in  the  flesh,  is  of  God : 

And  every  spirit,  that  dissolveth  Jesus,  is  not  of  God,  and 
this  is  antichrist,  of  whom  you  have  heard  that  he  cometh, 
and  he  is  now  already  in  the  world.'  " 

The  first  quotation  is  literally  quoted  from  John's  Second 
Epistle.  Irenseus  was  familiar  with  them  both,  and,  quot- 
ing from  memory,  it  is  due  to  a  fault  of  memory  that  he 
refers  the  passage  to  the  First  Epistle. 

In  op.  cit.  Lib.  LXVL  3,  he  again  quotes  the  Second 
Epistle :  "For  John,  the  disciple  of  the  Lord,  places  damna- 
tion upon  them,  not  allowing  us  to  bid  them  God  speed: 
'For  he  that  biddeth  him  God  speed,  is  partaker  of  his  evil 
deeds.'"— IL  Jo.  I.  11. 

These  data  leave  no  doubt  that  Irenaeus  received  and 
employed  as  Holy  Scripture,  at  least  the  First  and  Second 
Epistles  of  John.  But  since  the  history  of  the  Second  and 
Third  has  always  been  the  same,  it  is  highly  probable  that 
he  received  also  the  Third,  though  he  had  no  occasion  to 
quote  it. 

Irenaeus  made  great  use  of  the  Apocalypse.  In  op.  cit. 
Lib.  IV.  XXVI.  I,  Irenaeus  speaks  thus  of  the  Apocalypse: 
"And  yet  more  evidently,  of  the  last  age,  and  of  the  ten 
kings,  among  whom  will  be  divided  the  Empire  which  now 
exists,  has  John  the  disciple  of  the  Lord  made  known  in  the 
Apocalypse,"  etc. 


THE    CANON    OF    N.    T.    OF    TERTULLIAN  575 

In  the  same  book,  Chap.  XIV.  2,  he  testifies:  ''And  for 
this  cause,  John  in  the  Apocalypse  says:  "And  his  voice 
was  as  the  voice  of  many  waters.'  " — Apoc.  I.  15. 

Ibidem,  Chap.  XVII.  6:  "Incense,  saith  John  in  the 
Apocalypse,  is  the  prayers  of  the  saints." 

In  Chapter  XVIII.  6 :  "There  is  an  altar  in  Heaven  (for 
thither  our  prayers  and  oblations  are  directed)  and  a  temple, 
as  John  says  in  the  Apocalypse:  'And  the  temple  of  God 
was  opened';  and  there  is  a  tabernacle:  'For  behold,'  he 
saith,  'the  tabernacle  of  God  in  which  he  dwells  with  men.'  " 
—Apoc.  XI.  19;  XXI.  3. 

Equally  clear  quotations  are  found  in  op.  cit.  Lib.  IV., 
XX.  11;  XXL  4;  XXX.  4;  Lib.  v.,  XXVIII.  2;  XXX.  2,  4; 
XXXIV.  2;  XXXV.  2,  etc. 

From  these  researches,  w^e  are  led  to  believe  that  the 
church  of  Gaul  in  the  second  century  possessed  the  entire 
Canon. 

The  Canon  of  the  church  of  Proconsular  Africa  at  the 
close  of  the  second  century,  is  made  known  to  us  from  the 
works  of  Tertullian,  whose  literary  activity  ranges  from  195 
to  220. 

Tertullian  defends  against  Marcion  the  four  Gospels,  Lib. 
II.  ad  versus  Marcionem,  Cap.  II.* 

Again  in  Chapter  V.  he  asserts  the  authorship  of  Mat- 
thew, Luke,  Mark  and  John.f  The  chapter  opens  with  a 
clear  testimony  of  the  greater  Pauline  Epistles : 

"In  summa,  si  constant  id  verius  quod  prius,  id  prius 
quod  et  ab  initio,  id  ab  initio,  quod  ab  Apostolis;  pariter 
utique  constabit,  id  esse  ab  Apostolis  traditum,  quod  apud 

♦Constituimus  in  primis,  evangelicum  Instrumentum  Apostolos  aucto- 
res  habere,  quibus  hoc  munus  Evangelii  promulgandi  ab  ipso  Domino  sit 
impositum ;  si  et  Apostolicos,  non  tamen  solos,  sed  cum  Apostolis,  et  post 
Apostolos.  Quoniam  pra^dicatio  discipulorum  siispecta  fieri  posset  de 
glorias  studio,  si  non  adsistat  illi  auctoritas  magistrorum,  imo  Christi,  qui 
magistros  Apostolos  fecit.  Denique,  nobis  fidem  ex  Apostolis  Joannes  et 
Matthaius  insinuant;  ex  Apostolicis.  Lucas  et  Marcus  instaurant,  etc. 


fEadem  auctoritas  ecclesiarum  apostolicarum  cagteris  quoque  patro- 
cinabitur  Evangeliis,  quae  proinde  per  illas  et  secundum  illas  habemus, 
Joannis  dico  et  Matthaei,  licet  et  Marcus  quod  edidit  Petri  affirmettu",  cujus 
interpres  Marcus:  nam  et  Lucae  Digestum  Paulo  adscribere  solent. 


576  THE    CANON    OF    N.    T.    OF   TERTULLIAN 

ecclesias  Apostolorum  f  uerit  sacrosanctum .  Videamus  quod 
lac  a  Paulo  Corinthii  hauserint;  ad  quam  regulam  Galatae 
sint  recorrecti;  quid  legant  Philippenses,  Thessalonicenses, 
Ephesii;  quid  etiam  Romani  de  proximo  sonent,  quibus 
Evangelium  et  Petrus  et  Paulus  sanguine  quoque  suo  signa- 
tum  reliquerunt.  Habemus  et  Joannis  alumnas  ecclesias. 
Nam  etsi  Apocalypsim  ejus  Marcion  respuit,  ordo  tamen 
episcoporum  ad  originem  recensus,  in  Joannem  stabit  auc- 
torem." 

Tertullian  certainly  received  thirteen  Epistles  of  Paul. 
In  Lib.  V.  adv.  Marcion,  XXI.  he  speaks  thus  of  the  Epistle 
to  Philemon  :* 

"Soli  huic  Epistolae  bre vitas  sua  profuit,  ut  falsarias 
manus  Marcionis  evaderet.  Miror  tamen,  cum  ad  unum 
hominem  literas  factas  receperit,  quid  ad  Timotheum  duas, 
et  unam  ad  Titum,  de  ecclesiastico  statu  compositas  recu- 
saverit.  Adfectavit,  opinor,  etiam  numerum  Epistolarum 
interpolare." 

In  Lib.  V.  adv.  Marcion,  Cap.  I.  he  defends  the  Acts  of 
the  Apostles:  "Hsec  figurarum  sacramenta,  si  tibi  displi- 
cent,  certa  Acta  Apostolorum  (Act.  IX.)  hunc  mihi  ordinem 
Pauli  tradiderunt,  a  te  quoque  non  negandum." 

In  Lib.  de  Pudicitia,  Cap.  XX.  Tertullian  cites  the  Epis- 
tle to  the  Hebrews,  as  the  work  of  Barnabas. 

*'Volo  tamen  ex  redundantia  alicujus  etiam  comitis 
Apostolorum  testimonium  superducere,  idoneum  confirm- 
andi  de  proximo  jure  disciplinam  magistrorum.  Exstat 
enim  et  Barnabas  titulus  ad  Hebraeos,  adeo  satis  auctoritatis 
viri,  ut  quem  Paulus  juxta  se  constituent  in  abstinentiae 
tenore : '  Aut  ego  solus  et  Barnabas  non  habemus  hoc  operandi 
potestatem.'  Et  utique  receptior  apud  Ecclesias  Epistola 
Bamab^  illo  apocrypho  Pastore  moechorum.  Monens  ita- 
que  discipulos,  omissis  omnibus  initiis,  ad  perfectionem 
magis  tendere,  nee  rursus  fundamenta  poenitentiae  jacere  ab 
operibus  mortuorum:  Impossibile  est  enim,  inquit,  eos  qui 
semel  illuminati  sunt,  et  donum  coeleste  gustaverunt,  et  par- 
ticipaverunt  Spiritum  Sanctum,  et  verbum  Dei  dulce  gustav- 

*We  quote  Tertullian  in  the  original  Latin,  as  his  genius  appears  to 
better  effect  in  the  original. 


THE    CANON    OF    N.    T.    OF    TERTULLIAN  577 

erunt,  occidente  jam  aevo  cum  exciderint,  rursus  revocari  in 
poenitentiam,  refigentes  cruci  in  semetipsos  Filium  Dei  et 
dedecorantes.  Terra  enim  quae  bibit  saspius  devenientem  in 
se  humorem,  et  peperit  herbam  aptam  his  propter  quos  et 
colitur,  benedictionem  Dei  consequitur:  proferens  autem 
spinas,  reproba  et  maledictioni  proxima,  cujus  finis  in  exus- 
tionem.  Hoc  qui  ab  Apostolis  didicit  et  cum  Apostolis 
docuit,  nunquam  moecho  et  fomicatori  secundam  poenitent- 
iam promissam  ab  Apostolis  norat ;  optime  enim  legem  inter- 
pretabatur,  et  figuras  ejus  jam  in  ipsa  veritate  servabat." 

In  introducing  this  passage,  Tertullian  shows  clearly  that, 
though  not  personally  certain  of  its  inspiration,  he  consid- 
ered the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  of  great  authorit3^ 

He  made  much  use  of  the  Apocalypse,  and  of  the  First 
Epistle  of  St.  John.  I  found  no  direct  references  to  the 
other  two  in  his  works,  but  in  Chapter  XIX.  De  Pudicitia, 
he  says:  "Shall  we,  forsooth,  say  that  John  erred,  who  in 
his  -first  Epistle  denies  that  we  are  without  sin."  It  was 
certainly  in  contradistinction  to  other  Epistles  that  he  calls 
this  the  first.  The  Second  and  Third  of  John  are  brief,  and 
written  to  private  individuals.  For  this  reason,  they  have 
never  been  quoted  as  much  as  the  First.  This  was  the  evi- 
dent cause,  also,  why  they  are  not  expressly  quoted  by 
Tertullian. 

In  Chapter  III.  De  Cultu  Feminarum,  Tertullian  wishes 
to  obtain  endorsement  for  the  Book  of  Henoch :  *  'And  more- 
over, Henoch  has  a  testimony  in  Jude  the  Apostle."  (Jude 
V.  14.)  Though  he  erred  in  explaining  the  passage  of  Jude, 
he  is  a  competent  witness  that  the  Church  of  Africa  possessed 
in  that  day  the  Epistle  of  Jude  among  the  Holy  Books. 

Tertullian  often  quotes  the  First  Epistle  of  St.  Peter.  I 
found  no  quotations  from  the  Second  Epistle  in  his  works. 
This  argues  nothing  against  its  reception  by  the  Church  of 
Africa;  Tertullian  may  have  had  no  occasion  to  quote  it. 

In  Lib.  adversus  Judseos,  II.  he  used  the  expression, 
"Abraham  amicus  Dei  deputatus,"  which  seems  to  be  taken 
from  James,  II.  23. 

The  Second  Epistle  of  Peter  is  the  only  book  of  the  New 
Testament  which  has  nothing  in  the  works  of  Tertullian ;  the 

37  (H.S.) 


578    THE    CANON    OF   N.    T,    OF    CLEMENT    OF    ALEXANDRIA 

First  and  Second  of  John,  and  the  Epistle  of  James  have  but 
probable  approbation ;  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  with  him 
stops  a  little  short  of  canonicity,  but  all  the  other  books, 
both  by  direct  declaration  and  practical  use  are  endorsed  as 
undoubted  Holy  Scripture. 

In  the  works  of  St.  Cyprian,  who  succeeded  Tertullian  as 
chief  representative  of  the  African  Church,  abundant  quota- 
tions are  found  of  all  the  homologoumena,  including  the 
Apocalypse,  but  he  is  silent  concerning  the  antilegomena.  It 
would  be  absurd  to  interpret  this  silence  as  a  condemnation 
of  the  books.  At  most,  we  may  say  that  the  exceedingly 
conservative  spirit  of  Cyprian  drew  him  more  strongly  to  the 
books  of  which  no  one  doubted . 

The  tradition  of  the  Church  of  Alexandria  of  the  second 
century  is  made  known  to  us  by  Clement.  Among  all  the 
early  Fathers,  Clement  is  the  most  favorable  to  apocryphal 
writings.  There  is  no  evidence  that  he  made  them  equal  to 
Holy  Scripture,  but  he  was  willing  to  treat  with  considera- 
tion any  work  which  had  a  claim  to  respectability.  In  Lib. 
III.  Stromatum,  XIII.  he  shows  that  he  admitted,  four  and 
only  four  Gospels.  Replying  there  to  an  objection  taken 
from  an  apocryphal  gospel,  he  says:  'Tn  the  first  place,  in 
the  four  Gospels  which  have  been  handed  down  to  us,  we 
have  not  this  sa^ang,  but  in  the  Gospel  according  to  the 
Hebrews." 

Clement's  position  regarding  the  books  of  Scripture  ma}^ 
be  learned  from  Eusebius,  Hist.  Eccles.  VI.  14. 

*Tn  the  work  called  Hypoty poses,  to  sum  up  the  matter 
briefly,  he  has  given  us  abridged  accounts  of  all  the  canonical 
Scriptures,  not  even  omitting  those  that  are  disputed,  (The 
Antilegomena),  I  mean  the  book  of  Jude,  and  the  other  gen- 
eral Epistles.  Also  the  Epistle  of  Barnabas,  and  that  called 
the  Revelation  of  Peter.  But  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  he 
asserts  was  written  by  Paul,  to  the  Hebrews,  in  the  Hebrew 
tongue;  but  that  it  was  carefully  translated  by  Luke,  and 
published  among  the  Greeks.  Whence,  also,  one  finds  the 
same  character  of  style  and  of  phraseology  in  the  Epistle  as 
in  the  Acts.  'But  it  is  probable  that  the  title,  Paul  the 
Apostle,  was  not  prefixed  to  it.     For  as  he  wrote  to  the 


THE    CANON    OF   N.    T.    AT    CLOSE    OF    II.    CENTURY  579 

Hebrews,  who  had  imbibed  prejudices  against  him,  and 
suspected  him,  he  wisely  guards  against  diverting  them 
from  the  perusal,  by  giving  his  name.'  A  little  after  this 
he  observes:  'But  now  as  the  blessed  presbyter  used  to 
say,  since  the  Lord  who  was  the  apostle  of  the  Almighty, 
was  sent  to  the  Hebrews,  Paul  by  reason  of  his  inferiority, 
as  if  sent  to  the  Gentiles,  did  not  subscribe  himself  an  Apostle 
of  the  Hebrews;  both  out  of  reverence  for  the  Lord,  and 
because  he  wrote  of  his  abundance  to  the  Hebrews,  as  a  her- 
ald and  Apostle  of  the  Gentiles.'  Again,  in  the  same  work, 
Clement  also  gives  the  tradition  respecting  the  order  of  the 
Gospels,  as  derived  from  the  oldest  presbyter,  as  follows: 
He  says  that  those  which  contain  the  genealogies  were  writ- 
ten first ;  but  that  the  Gospel  of  Mark  was  occasioned  in  the 
following  manner:  'When  Peter  had  proclaimed  the  word 
publicly  at  Rome,  and  declared  the  Gospel  under  the  influ- 
ence of  the  spirit ;  as  there  was  a  great  number  present,  they 
requested  Mark,  who  had  followed  him  from  afar,  and  remem- 
bered well  what  he  had  said,  to  reduce  these  things  to  writ- 
ing, and  that  after  composing  the  Gospel  he  gave  it  to  those 
who  requested  it  of  him.  Which,  when  Peter  understood, 
he  directly  neither  hindered  nor  encouraged  it.  But  John, 
last  of  all,  perceiving  that  what  had  reference  to  the  body  in 
the  Gospel  of  our  Saviour,  was  sufficiently  detailed,  and 
being  encouraged  by  his  familiar  friends,  and  urged  by  the 
spirit,  he  wrote  a  spiritual  Gospel.'     Thus  far  Clement." 

The  commentaries  of  Clement  on  the  First  Epistle  of  St. 
Peter,  and  the  Epistle  of  St.  Jude  have  been  preserved  to  us 
by  Cassiodorus  in  a  Latin  translation  (Cassiod.  De  Inst.  Div. 

Lit.  vm.). 

In  the  works  of  Clement  that  remain  to  us,  I  found  no 
certain  reference  to  11.  Peter.  Some  allusions  to  St.  James' 
Epistle  exist  (Strom.  V.  14;  VI.  18);  but  the  testimony  of 
Eusebius  leaves  no  doubt  that  Clement  received  these  works. 
Eusebius'  testimony  is  corroborated  by  Photius,  who  testi- 
fies that  Clement  commented  the  Epistles  of  Paul  and  the 
Catholic  Epistles.  (Biblioth.  109.  Patrol.  G.  103,  384) 

In  II.  Strom.  XV.  Clement  speaks  of  I.  John,  as  the 
greater  Epistle,  'lcodpv€<i  iv  rrj  fiei^ovi  iinaToXy.     This  shows 


580   THE  CANON  OF  N.  T.  AT  CLOSE  OF  II.  CENTURY 

shows  plainly  that  he  recognized  at  least  one  of  the  others, 
and,  as  we  have  said  before,  the  history  of  the  two  is  the 
same.  We  believe,  therefore,  that  Clement  received  them 
both.  The  defect  of  explicit  quotations  would  be  unjustly 
invoked  against  those  short  books,  which  are  of  secondary 
importance  from  a  doctrinal  standpoint. 

The  greater  part  of  Clement's  Hypotyposes,  was  devoted 
to  the  exegesis  of  the  New  Testament.  Only  fragments  of 
the  work  remain  in  the  Latin  translation  of  Cassiodorus. 
Hence,  is  explained  that  in  those  fragments  we  find  not 
Clement's  commentary  on  the  Epistle  of  St.  James,  on  II. 
Peter,  and  III.  John.  Without  doubt,  they  had  place  in 
the  complete  work  according  to  the  explicit  testimony  of 
Eusebius. 

We  find,  therefore,  at  the  close  of  the  second  century, 
that  all  the  churches  concur  in  receiving  the  four  written 
Gospels.  These  were  sometimes  called  the  * 'Writings  of  the 
Lord."  Thus  Dionysius  of  Corinth  in  Epistle  to  Romans: 
**It  is  not,  therefore,  matter  of  wonder  if  some  have  also 
attempted  to  adulterate  the  sacred  writings  of  the  Lord,  since 
they  have  attempted  the  same  in  other  works,  that  are  not 
to  be  compared  with  these." 

The  writers  of  this  period  also  give  evidence  that  they 
already  of  old  time  received  these  Gospels,  and  only  these 
Gospels  were  received  by  all  the  churches. 

Certain  allusions  to  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  are  found  in 
the  writings  of  Clement  of  Rome,  Ignatius  Martyr,  arid  St. 
Justin ;  but  the  testimony  of  the  Canon  of  Muratori  is  explicit 
for  their  canonicity.  The  faith  of  Irenseus,  as  we  have 
seen,  was  the  same.  Tertullian  inveighs  bitterly  against 
those  (the  Manicheans)  who  rejected  the  Acts : 

" — et  utique  implevit  repromissum,  probantibus  Actis 
Apostolorum,  descensum  Spirit  us  Sancti.  Quam  Scripturam 
qui  non  recipiunt,  nee  Spiritus  Sancti  esse  possunt,  qui 
necdum  Spiritum  possint  agnoscere  discentibus  missum, 
sed  nee  Ecclesiam  defendere,  qui,  quando  et  quibus  incuna- 
bulis  institutum  est  hoc  corpus,  probare  non  habent." 

Clement  of  Alexandria  also  makes  great  use  of  this  Scrip- 
ture, and  attributes  it  to  Paul.     All  things  warrant  that  it 


THE    CANON    OF    N.    T.    AT    CLOSE    OF    II.    CENTURY         581 

had  a  place  in  the  Canon  in  all  the  churches,  before  the  close 
of  the  second  century,  and  no  doubt  has  since  been  raised  in 
the  Catholic  Church  concerning  it. 

From  a  conspectus  of  the  preceding  data,  it  is  evident 
that,  excepting  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  all  the  Epistles 
of  Paul  were  universally  accepted  as  Holy  Scripture.  It  is 
not  the  place  here  to  answer  the  objections  of  F.  Chr.  Baur 
against  the  Epistles  to  the  Thessalonians.  Those  objec- 
tions, or  rather  cavils,  are  sought  from  the  nature  of  the 
books  themselves,  and  will  be  answered  in  the  exegesis  of 
the  books.  We  are  here  dealing  only  with  the  belief  of  the 
Church  regarding  the  books  of  Scripture  and  the  evidence 
of  this,  as  regards  thirteen  Epistles  of  Paul,  is  convincing. 
Even  the  short  Epistle  to  Philemon  finds  its  place  in  Mura- 
tori's  Canon :  in  the  words  of  Tertullian  (loc.  cit),  it  escaped 
the  mutilation  of  Marcion.  In  the  words  of  St.  Jerome :  **It 
would  never  have  been  received  by  all  the  churches  through- 
out the  whole  world,  unless  it  w^as  held  to  be  Paul's  Epistle." 
(Prol.  in  Philem.) 

In  this  period,  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  was  received 
with  more  favor  in  the  East  than  in  the  West.  We  know 
from  Eusebius  (loc.  cit.)  that  Clement  of  Alexandria  received 
it.  Clement's  testimony  is  confirmed  by  that  of  Pantsenus 
(the  blessed  presbyter) .  (Euseb.  Hist.  Eccles.  VI.  14.)  All 
the  Fathers  of  the  Alexandrian  Church  have  accepted  and 
used  the  Epistle. 

Its  presence,  as  fourteenth  among  Paul's  Epistles,  in  the 
Peshitto,  is  sufficient  guarantee  of  its  reception  by  the 
ancient  Syrian  Church. 

In  reviewing  the  works  of  Irenseus,  we  have  pointed  out 
his  references  to  this  Epistle.  Eusebius  (loc.  cit.)  confirms 
our  belief  that  Irenseus  received  it.* 

The  testimony  of  Tertullian,  while  it  does  not  place  the 
book  beyond  the  possibilit}^  of  doubt,  recognizes  the  book  as 
widely  known  and  respected.     The  status  of  the  book  grew 

♦The  statement  of  Gobar  in  Biblioth.  of  Photius,  that  Irenaeus  rejected 
Paul's  authorship  of  the  Epistle,  may  simply  mean  that  he  doubted  of  the 
author,  but  not  of  the  divine  character  of  the  book.  Such  a  view  was  held 
by  more  than  one. 


582   THE  CANON  OF  N.  T.  AT  CLOSE  OF  II.  CENTURY 

constantly  more  favorable  in  the  Western  Church  from  this 
time  forth. 

Rome  seems  to  have  been  the  center  of  the  doubts  of  that 
period  regarding  the  divine  authority  of  the  book.  We  have 
seen  that  it  is  omitted  from  the  Canon  of  Muratori,  and  Euse- 
bius  testifies  also  in  Hist.  Eccles.  VI.  20,  that  Caius  of  Rome 
and  other  Romans  did  not  receive  the  Epistle. 

The  testimony  of  the  first  two  centuries  in  favor  of  St. 
James'  Epistle  might  be  summed  up  as  follows :  Clear  refer- 
ences in  the  works  of  Clement  of  Rome;  allusions  in  the 
works  of  Justin  and  Irenaeus;  quotations  in  the  Pastor  of 
Hermas ;  and  a  place  among  the  canonical  Scriptures  in  the 
Peshitto. 

The  testimonies  of  this  period  in  favor  of  the  First  Epis- 
tle of  Peter  are  clear  and  explicit.  Eusebius  testifies,  Hist. 
Eccles.  ni.  39,  that  Papias  made  use  of  testimonies  from  it. 
At  least  eight  quotations  from  it  are  found  in  the  short 
Epistle  of  Poly  carp  that  is  preserved  for  us.  The  finest 
testimonies  for  it  exist  in  the  works  of  Clement,  Irenseus  and 
Tertullian.  We  have  already  explained  its  omission  from 
Muratori's  Canon. 

For  the  Second  Epistle  of  St.  Peter,  we  have  nothing 
clearer  in  the  first  two  centuries,  than  the  references  already 
adduced  in  the  works  of  Irenseus.  With  Origen  the  data 
becomes  more  convincing. 

The  Epistle  of  Jude  has  a  secure  place  in  the  Canon  of 
Muratori.  Tertullian  (loc.  cit.)  uses  it  as  an  authority 
acknowledged  by  all.  Clement  of  Alexandria  commented  it. 
St.  Jerome  declares  that:  "Jude  left  a  short  epistle,  which  is 
one  of  the  seven  Catholic  Epistles ;  since  he  assumes  a  testi- 
mony from  the  apocryphal  book  of  Henoch,  it  is  rejected  by 
several;  nevertheless,  it  merits  authority  by  its  antiquity 
and  use,  and  is  reckoned  among  the  Holy  Scriptures."  (S. 
Hier.  De.  Vir.  111.  M.  23,  645.) 

The  First  Epistle  of  John  was  known  and  used  by  Papias 
and  Poly  carp.  Irenseus  quotes  it  frequently,  often  naming 
its  author.  The  Canon  of  Muratori  places  it  among  the 
canonical  Scriptures.  Tertullian  and  Clement  of  Alexan- 
dria make  it  equal  to  the  Gospel  of  St.  John.     The  Peshitto 


THE    CANON    OF    N.    T.    AT    CLOSE    OF    II.    CENTURY        583 

of  the  Syriac  places  it  among  the  canonical  Scriptures,  and  no 
reasonable  doubt  has  ever  been  raised  concerning  it. 

The  other  two  Epistles  of  John  have  not  equal  endorse- 
ment in  these  two  centuries.  In  the  testimony  of  Jerome 
(De  Vir.  111.  IX.  i8),  John's  authorship  of  these  two  Epistles 
was  rejected  by  many  (plerisque) .  Investigation  into  patris- 
tic literature  fails  to  make  known  who  these  many  were. 

The  Epistles  have  an  indirect  approbation  in  TertuUian, 
De  Pudic.  19,  where  he  speaks  of  the  First  Epistle  of  John  as 
prima.  Had  he  admitted  only  two,  he  would  undoubtedly 
have  used,  in  prior e.  We  have  before  shown  that  Irenseus 
received  the  Second  Epistle  of  John,  and  as  the  history  of 
the  two  is  intimately  bound  up  together,  we  believe  that  he 
received  also  the  Third.  The  same  can  be  said  of  Clement 
of  Alexandria,  who  in  Strom.  II.  15,  speaks  of  I.  John  as  the 
greater  Epistle.  Fragments  of  his  commentary  on  II.  John 
are  preserved  for  us  by  Cassiodorus,  (op.  cit.).  Finally  Mur- 
atori's  Canon  leaves  no  reasonable  doubt  that  the  three 
Epistles  were  received  in  the  Church  of  Rome. 

There  is  scarcely  a  book  in  the  New  Testament,  which 
received  so  many  clear  testimonies  in  the  second  century  as 
the  Apocalypse.  On  the  testimony  of  Irenseus,  we  know 
that  the  book  was  written  toward  the  close  of  the  reign  of 
Domitian,  therefore,  about  the  year  95  A.  D.  Wherefore  no 
testimonies  of  the  first  century  are  to  be  sought.  But  in  the 
following  age  St.  Justin,  St.  Hippolyte,  TertuUian,  Irenseus, 
Papias,  Melito  of  Sardis,  St.  Theophilus  of  Antioch,  Clement 
of  Alexandria  and  the  Canon  of  Muratori,  testify  to  its 
authenticity  and  divine  character.  Opposition  and  doubt 
arose  in  the  following  century  concerning  it.  Certain  here- 
tics arose  at  that  time  who  abused  its  authority  to  acquire 
favor  for  Millenarianism.  Hence,  though  we  find  none  who 
reject  it,  the  Fathers  made  less  use  of  it,  as  its  deep  myster- 
ious sense  perplexed  the  minds  of  these  who  were  defending 
Catholic  truth  against  the  error  of  the  Chiliasts.  St.  Diony- 
sius  the  Great,  one  of  the  leading  Fathers,  in  combating  this 
heresy,  thus  speaks  of  the  book : 

"Some,  indeed,  before  us,  have  set  aside,  and  have 
attempted  to  refute  the  whole  book,  criticising  every  chapter. 


584        THE  CANON  OF  N.  T.  OF  III.  CENTURY 

and  pronouncing  it  without  sense  and  without  reason .  They 
say  that  it  has  a  false  title,  for  it  is  not  of  John.  Nay,  that 
it  is  not  even  a  revelation,  as  it  is  covered  with  such  a  dense 
and  thick  veil  of  ignorance,  that  not  one  of  the  Apostles, 
and  not  one  of  the  holy  men,  or  those  of  the  church  could  be 
its  author.  But  that  Cerinthus,  the  founder  of  the  sect  of 
Cerinthians,  so  called  from  him,  wishing  to  have  reputable 
authority  for  his  own  fiction,  prefixed  the  title.  For  this  is 
the  doctrine  of  Cerinthus,  that  there  will  be  an  earthly  reign 
of  Christ ;  and  as  he  w^as  a  lover  of  the  body,  and  altogether 
sensual  in  those  things  which  he  so  eagerly  craved,  he 
dreamed  that  he  would  revel  in  the  gratification  of  the  sen- 
sual appetite,  i.  e.  in  eating  and  drinking,  and  marrying;  and 
to  give  the  things  a  milder  aspect  and  expression,  in  festivals 
and  sacrifices,  and  the  slaying  of  victims.  For  my  part  I 
would  not  venture  to  set  this  book  aside,  as  there  are  many 
brethren  that  value  it  much;  but  having  formed  a  concep- 
tion of  its  subject  as  exceeding  my  capacity,  I  consider  it 
also  containing  a  certain  concealed  and  wonderful  intima- 
tion in  each  particular.  For,  though  I  do  not  understand, 
yet  I  suspect  that  some  deeper  sense  is  enveloped  in  the 
words,  and  these  I  do  not  measure  and  judge  by  my  private 
reason;  but  allowing  more  to  faith,  I  have  regarded  them  as 
too  lofty  to  be  comprehended  by  me,  and  those  things  which 
I  do  not  understand,  1  do  not  reject,  but  I  wonder  the  more 
that  I  cannot  comprehend." 

At  the  opening  of  the  third  century,  we  find  the  Canon  of 
the  New  Testament  well  established,  not  by  official  decree  but 
by  traditional  usage.  Certain  divergencies  existed  regard- 
ing a  few  books.  Muratori's  Canon  omits  the  Epistle  of  St. 
James  while  Clement  of  Alexandria  uses  it  as  though  all  the 
churches  recognized  its  divine  authority. 

The  two  great  representatives  of  Catholic  thought  of  the 
third  century  are  Origen  and  Eusebius. 

The  capacious  mind  of  Origen  examined  the  difi'erent 
collections  of  Scripture  of  the  different  churches,  and  com- 
pared them.  His  views  respecting  the  Gospels  are  manifes- 
ted in  his  Homily  on  Luke:  'The  Church  has  four  Gospels; 
heresy  has  many Only  four  Gospels  are  approved. 


THE    CANON   OF    N.    T.    OF    ORIGEN  585 

out  of  which  as  representing  our  Law  and  Saviour,  dogmas 
are  to  be  proven.  ...  In  all  these  we  admit  naught  else 
than  is  admitted  by  the  Church,  that  only  four  Gospels  are 
to  be  received." 

Some  recur  to  a  testimony  from  Origen  in  Eusebius,  Hist, 
Eccles.  VI.  25,  to  establish  Origen 's  Canon: 

**As  I  have  understood  from  tradition,  respecting  the  four 
Gospels  which  are  the  only  undisputed  ones  in  the  whole 
Church  of  God  throughout  the  world.  The  first  is  written  ac- 
cording to  Matthew,  the  same  that  was  once  a  publican,  but 
afterwards  an  Apostle  of  Jesus  Christ,  who  having  published  it 
for  the  Jewish  converts,  wrote  it  in  the  Hebrew.  The  second 
is  according  to  Mark,  who  composed  it,  as  Peter  explained  to 
him,  whom  he  also  acknowledges  as  his  son  in  his  general 
Epistle,  saying,  'The  elect  church  in  Babylon,  salutes  you,  as 
also  Mark  my  son.'  And  the  third,  according  to  Luke,  the 
Gospel,  commended  by  Paul,  which  was  written  for  the  con- 
verts from  the  Gentiles,  and  last  of  all  the  Gospel  according 
to  John."  And  in  the  fifth  book  of  his  Commentaries  on 
John,  the  same  author  writes  as  follows:  "But  he  (Paul) 
being  well  fitted  to  be  a  minister  of  the  New  Testament,  I 
mean  a  minister  not  of  the  letter  but  of  the  spirit ;  who,  after 
spreading  the  Gospel  from  Jerusalem  and  the  country  around 
as  far  as  Illyricum,  did  not  even  write  to  all  the  churches  to 
which  he  preached,  but  even  to  those  to  whom  he  wrote  he 
only  sent  a  few  lines.  But  Peter,  upon  whom  the  Church  of 
Christ  is  built,  against  which  the  gates  of  hell  shall  not  pre- 
vail, has  left  one  Epistle  undisputed.  Suppose,  also,  the 
second  was  left  by  him,  for  on  this  there  is  some  doubt. 
What  shall  we  say  of  him  who  reclined  upon  the  breast  of 
Jesus,  I  mean  John  ?  who  has  left  one  Gospel,  in  which  he  con- 
fesses that  he  could  write  so  many  that  the  whole  world  could 
not  contain  them.  He  also  wrote  the  Apocalypse,  com- 
manded as  he  was,  to  conceal,  and  not  to  write  the  voices  of 
the  seven  thunders.  He  has  also  left  an  Epistle  consisting  of 
very  few  lines ;  suppose,  also,  that  a  second  and  third  are  from 
him,  for  not  all  agree  that  they  are  genuine,  but  both  together 
do  not  contain  a  hundred  lines."  To  these  remarks  he  also 
adds  the  following  observation  on  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews, 


586  THE   CANON   OF   N.   T.    OF    ORIGEN 

in  his  homilies  on  the  same:  "The  style  of  the  Epistle  with 
the  title,  To  the  Hebrews,'  has  not  that  simplicity  of  diction 
which  belongs  to  the  Apostle,  who  confesses  that  he  is  but 
common  in  speech,  that  is  in  his  phraseology.  But  that  this 
Epistle  is  more  pure  Greek  in  the  composition  of  its  phrases, 
every  one  will  confess  who  is  able  to  discern  the  difference 
of  style.  Again,  it  will  be  obvious  that  the  ideas  of  the 
Epistle  are  admirable,  and  not  inferior  to  any  of  the  books 
acknowledged  to  be  apostolic.  Every  one  will  confess  the 
truth  of  this,  who  attentively  reads  the  Apostle's  writings." 
To  these  he  afterwards  again  adds :  *  'But  I  would  say,  that 
the  thoughts  are  the  Apostle's,  but  the  diction  and  phrase- 
ology belong  to  some  one,  who  has  recorded  what  the  Apostle 
said,  and  as  one  who  noted  down  at  his  leisure  what  his 
master  dictated.  If,  then,  any  church  considers  this  Epistle 
as  coming  from  Paul,  let  it  be  commended  for  this,  for  neither 
did  those  ancient  men  deliver  it  as  such  without  cause.  But 
who  it  was  that  really  wrote  the  Epistle,  God  only  knows. 
The  account,  however,  that  has  been  current  before  us,  is, 
according  to  some,  that  Clement  who  was  bishop  of  Rome 
wrote  the  Epistle ;  according  to  others,  that  it  was  written 
by  Luke,  who  wrote  the  Gospel  and  the  Acts." 

The  Epistles  of  James  and  Jude  are  omitted;  II.  Peter 
and  II.  and  HI.  John  are  considered  doubtful.  It  would  be 
erroneous  to  accept  this  as  Origen's  position  on  the  Canon. 
The  passage  is  found  in  the  beginning  of  the  fifth  tome  of  his 
Commentary  on  St.  John.  He  is  there  justifying  himself 
for  not  writing  more,  and  cites  the  example  of  some  of  the 
writers  of  the  New  Testament.  To  make  the  argument 
forcible,  he  restricts  the  works  in  the  narrowest  compass, 
and  uses  for  this  scope  the  occasional  doubts  that  existed 
in  some  churches.  In  fact,  Origen,  through  display  of  eru- 
dition, mentions  these  doubts  which  he  did  not  personally 
entertain.  There  was  no  need  of  a  complete  list  of  the 
writers,  and  he  has  not  drawn  up  a  complete  list.  He  took 
the  more  prominent.  It  is  evident  that  it  was  not  his  inten- 
tion to  enumerate  all  the  books  of  the  New  Testament. 


THE    CANON    OF    N.    T.    OF    ORIGEN  587 

Origen  quoted  II.  Peter  in  his  XII.  Homily  on  Exodus,  4 : 
"I  know  that  it  is  written:  Tor  of  whom  a  man  is  over- 
come, of  the  same  is  he  brought  in  bondage.'  "     (II.  Pet.  II. 

19)- 

Again  in  Hom.  IV.  on  Levit.  4:  ''And  again  Peter  saith: 
'Ye  are  become  partakers  of  the  divine  nature.'  "     (II.  Pet. 

1. 14). 

Hom.  XIII.  on  Num.  8 :  " — as  the  Scripture  saith  in  a  cer- 
tain place:  ' — the  dumb  ass,  speaking  with  man's  voice, 
forbade  the  madness  of  the  prophet.'  "     (II.  Pet.  II.  16.) 

Origen  reveals  his  personal  opinion  of  the  Epistle  of  Jude 
in  '^Comment,  in  Math.  "Tom.  X.  17 :  "And  Jude  wrote  an 
Epistle,  of  few  verses,  indeed,  but  full  of  efficacious  words  of 
divine  grace ;  which  he  begins  by  saying :  'Jude,  the  servant 
of  Jesus  Christ,  brother  of  James.'  "  Nevertheless,  Origen 
was  not  ignorant  that  some  doubted  of  this  Epistle,  and  he 
takes  account  of  this  doubt  in  op.  cit.  Tom.  XVII. :  "If  any 
one  receives  also  the  Epistle  of  Jude,  let  him  consider  what 
follows  from  this  doctrine,  for  the  reason  that,  'The  Angels 
who  kept  not  their  first  estate,  but  left  their  first  habitation, 
he  hath  reserved  in  everlasting  chains  under  darkness  unto 
the  judgment  of  the  great  day.'  "     (Jude,  I.  6.) 

In  this  citation  Origen  simply  shows  his  comprehensive 
knowledge  of  the  thought  of  his  day.  He  received  the 
Epistle,  but  in  arguing  therefrom,  he  had  to  take  into  con- 
sideration that  its  authority  would  not  have  equal  weight 
with  all.  It  required  a  great  deal  in  those  days  to  secure  for 
a  book  immunity  from  doubt :  a  slight  cause  was  sufficient 
to  raise  some  doubt,  which  "crescebat  eundo,"  concerning 
some  of  the  minor  books  of  the  Testament. 

Equally  certain  are  Origen's  views  on  St.  James 
Epistle.  In  ''Horn.  VIII.  in  Exod."  4,  he  says:  "But  the 
Apostle  James  says :  'A  double-minded  man  is  unstable  in 
all  his  ways.'  "     (James,  I.  8.) 

In  **Hom.  II.  in  Levit."  4 :  "Thus  saith  Holy  Scripture : 
'—who  converteth  the  sinner  from  the  error  of  his  way,  shall 
save  a  soul  from  death,  and  vshall  hide  a  multitude  of  sins.'  " 
(James,  V.  20.) 


588  THE    CANON    OF    N.    T.    OF    EUSEBIUS 

In  "Horn.  XIII .  in  Genesim"  2,  Origen  likens  the  books 
of  the  New  Testament  to  the  wells  which  Isaac  and  his  ser- 
vants dug,  and  he  places  James  and  Jude  in  the  number. 
In  this  simile,  Isaac  represents  the  Lord.  The  servants  of 
Isaac  represent  the  other  authors  of  the  New  Testament : 
"Isaac,  therefore,  dug  new  wells ;  the  servants  of  Isaac  dug 
new  wells  also.  The  servants  of  Isaac  are  Matthew,  Mark, 
Luke  and  John.  His  servants  are  Peter,  James  and  Jude, 
and  also  Paul,  for  they  all  dug  the  wells  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment." 

Upon  this  data  we  believe  that  Origen 's  Canon  is  that 
which  he  makes  known  to  us  in  his  Seventh  Homily  on  the 
Book  of  Joshua,  i,  wherein  he  compares  the  authors  of  the 
New  Testament  to  Joshua  and  the  priests  who  besieged 
Jericho :  "The  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  of  whom  that  first  Joshua 
was  a  type,  coming,  sends  priests,  his  Apostles  bearing  trum- 
pets of  rams'  horns,  the  grand  and  heavenly  doctrine  of  the 
Gospel.  Matthew  sounded  first  the  sacerdotal  trumpet  in 
his  Gospel;  Mark  follows;  then  Luke  and  John  blow  their 
proper  trumpets.  Peter  sends  forth  blasts  from  the  trum- 
pets of  his  two  Epistles;  James  and  Jude  do  likewise.  John 
joins  in  with  the  trumpet -blast  of  his  Epistles  and  Apocalypse 
and  Luke  with  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles.  And  lastly  comes 
he  who  said:  *For  I  think  that  God  hath  set  forth  us,  the 
Apostles,  the  least  of  men,'  and  thundering  through  the 
trumpets  of  his  fourteen  Epistles  completely  overthrows  the 
engines  of  idolatry  and  the  dogmas  of  the  philosophers." 

In  ascribing  a  plurality  of  Epistles  to  John,  the  Second 
and  Third  of  his  Epistles  are  virtually  approved,  for  they 
are  inseparably  linked  together  in  their  history. 

Origen  is  not  there  formulating  a  new  theory.  He  is 
here  the  oracle  of  two  centuries  of  Catholic  belief  and 
practice. 

The  place  in  the  Catholic  Church  which  the  Holy  Books 
had  acquired  in  Origen 's  time,  they  have  retained  ever  since. 

The  sporadic  doubts  which  in  the  course  of  the  centuries 
arose  and  fell,  availed  naught  to  shake  their  credit  in  the 
Church.     The  books  were  a  part  of  the  mighty  life  of  the 


THE    CANON    OF    N.    T.    01''    EUSEBIUS  589 

Church,  and  the  occasional  doubts  of  individuals  only  served 
to  bring  out  more  clearly  the  doctrine  which  was  the  same 
from  the  beginning. 

The  documents  w^hich  we  shall  henceforth  adduce  will  be 
chosen  out  of  the  universal  testimony  of  tradition,  on  account 
of  their  special  bearing  on  the  deuterocanonical  books. 

DiONYsius  THE  Great,  the  disciple  of  Origen,  cites  the 
Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  as  the  work  of  Paul.  He  employs 
the  Epistle  of  James  (Fragment  on  Luke  XXII.),  and  recog- 
nizes the  First  and  Second  Epistles  of  John.  (Euseb.  Hist. 
Eccles.  VII.  25). 

MethodIus  of  Tyre,  cites  the  Apocalypse  as  inspired  by 
Christ,  and  makes  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  equal  to  the 
other  Epistles  of  Paul.     (Conviv.  Or.  I.  5  ;  Or.  VIII.  4). 

Eusebius  of  Caesarea,  who  was  a  diligent  searcher  into 
the  traditions  and  documents  of  his  times,  has  treated  the 
question  of  the  Canon  of  the  New  Testament  ex  professo  in  his 
Hist.  Eccles.  III.  25  : 

"This  appears  also  to  be  the  proper  place,  to  give  a  sum- 
mary statement  of  the  books  of  the  New  Testament  already 
mentioned.  And  here,  among  the  first,  must  be  placed  the 
holy  Quaternion  of  the  Gospels;  these  are  followed  by  the 
book  of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles;  after  this  must  be  men- 
tioned the  Epistles  of  Paul,  which  are  followed  by  the 
acknowledged  First  Epistle  of  John,  as  also  the  First  of 
Peter,  to  be  admitted  in  like  manner.  After  these,  are  to  be 
placed,  if  proper,  the  Revelation  of  John,  concerning  which 
we  shall  offer  the  different  opinions  in  due  time.  These, 
then,  are  acknowledged  genuine.  Among  the  disputed 
books,  although  they  are  well  known  and  approved  by  many, 
are  reputed  that  called  the  Epistle  of  James  and  that  of  Jude. 
Also  the  'Second  Epistle  of  Peter,'  and  those  called  'The 
Second  and  Third  of  John,'  whether  they  are  of  the  Evange- 
list or  of  some  other  of  the  same  name.  Among  the  spurious 
must  be  numbered  both  the  books  called  'The  Acts  of  Paul,' 
and  that  called  'Pastor,'  and  'The  Revelation  of  Peter.' 
Beside  these,  the  books  called  'The  Epistle  of  Barnabas,'  and 
what  are  called  'The  Institutions  of  the  Apostles!'  More- 
over, as  I  said  before,  if  it  should  appear  right,  "The  Revela- 


590  THE    CANON    OF    N.    T.    EUSEBIUS 

tion  of  John,'  which  some,  as  before  said,  reject,  but  others 
rank  among  the  genuine.  But  there  are  also  some  who  num- 
ber among  these,  the  Gospel  according  to  the  Hebrews,  with 
which  those  of  the  Hebrews  that  have  received  Christ  are 
particularly  delighted.  These  may  be  said  to  be  all  concern- 
ing which  there  is  any  dispute.  We  have,  however,  neces- 
sarily subjoined  here  a  catalogue  of  these  also,  in  order  to 
distinguish  those  that  are  true,  genuine,  and  well  authenti- 
cated writings,  from  those  others  which  are  not  only  not 
embodied  in  the  Canon,  but  likewise  disputed,  notwithstand- 
ing that  they  are  recognized  by  most  ecclesiastical  writers." 

Eusebius  has  not  passed  definite  judgment  on  the  ques- 
tion of  the  Canon.  As  a  faithful  historian  he  records  the 
historical  status  of  the  books.  The  echo  of  the  doubts  which 
had  their  origin  in  the  preceding  ages  could  not  be  stilled  ex- 
cept by  the  authoritative  voice  of  the  Church. 

Eusebius  arranges  the  books  in  three  classes.  First 
came  ra  ofioXoyovfjieva,  the  books  of  which  no  one  ever 
doubted.  These  are  the  four  Gospels,  the  Acts,  the  Epistles 
of  Paul,  the  I.  of  Peter,  the  I.  of  John,  and,  if  one  judges  well, 
(el  <f>avei7))  the  Apocalypse.  It  is  evident  that  Euse- 
bius includes  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  in  Paul's  Epistles, 
since  it  was  universally  known  in  his  day,  and  he  places  it  in 
no  other  class.  Moreover,  in  lib.  cit.  III.  he  had  declared, 
''that  the  fourteen  Epistles  of  Paul  were  manifestly  known 
to  all." 

The  second  class  is  made  up  of  the  avrtXeyo/jieva,  yvayptfia 
Se  Tot9  TToWot?,  the  books  which  had  been  doubted 
of  by  some,  but  received  by  the  many.  These  are  the  Epistle 
of  James,  the  Epistle  of  Jude,  II.  Peter,  and  II.  and  III.  of 
John. 

The  third  class  he  calls  spurious,  voOa,  composed  of  the 
Acts  of  Paul,  Pastor,  the  Apocalypse  of  Peter,  the  Epistle  of 
Barnabas,  the  Doctrine  of  the  Apostles,  the  Gospel  accord- 
ing to  the  Hebrews,  and,  if  it  seems  well,  the  Apocalypse  of 
John.  In  an  inferior  place  he  ranges  the  impious  books,  the 
inventions  of  heretics. 

This  document  contains  not  so  much  the  present  status 
of  the  books,  as  their  past  history ;  Eusebius  fills  the  role  of  a 
chronicler,  not  a  critic. 


THE    CANON    OF    N.    T.    OF    EUSEBIUS  591 

The  peculiar  position  of  the  Apocalypse  is  the  effect  of 
the  causes  before  mentioned.  Up  to  the  middle  of  the  third 
century  the  work  had  been  received  by  all.  In  virtue  of 
this  universal  acceptance  Eusebius  gives  it  its  place  among 
the  books  of  the  first  Canon.  The  rise  of  the  Millenarian 
heresy  drew  opposition  upon  the  book.  Its  mysterious  sense 
was  abused  by  the  Millenarians ;  and  the  defenders  of  the 
faith,  being  hard  pressed,  began  by  casting  doubt  upon  the 
authenticity  of  the  book,  and  later,  upon  its  divine  char- 
acter. Hence,  some  rejected  the  book  as  spurious.  As 
Eusebius  rightly  says,  it  was  accepted  by  all  in  one  period 
of  history ;  it  was  rejected  by  some  in  another.  He  does  not 
decide  the  issue ;  he  adduces  the  historical  data,  and  allows 
the  reader  to  decide. 

In  op.  cit.  Lib.  3,  Eusebius  speaks  thus:  "As  to  the 
writing  of  Peter,  one  of  his  Epistles  called  the  First,  is 
acknowledged  as  genuine.  For  this  was  anciently  used  by 
the  ancient  Fathers  in  their  writings,  as  an  undoubted  work 
of  the  Apostle.  But  that  which  is  called  the  Second,  we 
have  not,  indeed,  understood  to  be  embodied  with  the  sacred 
books,  ivhaOrixov,  yet  as  it  appeared  useful  to  many,  it  was 
studiously  read  with  the  other  Scriptures  . 

Again,  ibid. :  ''The  Epistles  of  Paul  are  fourteen,  all  well 
known  and  beyond  doubt.  It  should  not,  however,  be  con- 
cealed, that  some  have  set  aside  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews, 
saying,  that  it  was  disputed,  as  not  being  one  of  St.  Paul's 
Epistles ;  but  we  shall  in  the  proper  place,  also  subjoin  what 
has  been  said  by  those  before  our  time  respecting  this  Epis- 
tle." 

Eusebius  is  inclined  to  magnify  the  importance  of  the 
individual  doubts,  lest  he  should  be  thought  to  have  been 
ignorant  of  them.  The  fact  that  a  book  was  not  mentioned 
by  many  ancient  Fathers,  though  explainable  from  the 
nature  of  the  writing,  was  often  taken  by  him  as  an  evidence 
of  doubt.  And  yet,  the  testimony  of  tradition  even  at  his 
hands  is  most  favorable  to  our  books. 

The  Church  of  Alexandria  seems  to  have  cleared  itself 
from  all  doubt  in  the  fourth  century. 


592  THE    CANON   OF   N.    T.    OF   ATHANASIUS 

St.  Athanasius,  its  oracle  in  that  age,  thus  manifests  its 
faith :  'The  books  of  the  New  Testament  are  the  four  Gos- 
pels of  Matthew,  Mark,  Luke  and  John  respectively;  the 
Acts  of  the  Apostles ;  Seven  Epistles,  which  are  one  of  James, 
two  of  Peter,  three  of  John  and  one  of  Jude.  The  Fourteen 
Epistles  of  Paul  follow  in  this  order:  Romans,  two  to  the 
Corinthians,  Galatians,  Ephesians,  Philippians,  Colossians, 
two  to  the  Thessalonians,  Hebrews,  two  to  Timothy,  one  to 
Titus  and  one  to  Philemon.  Lastly  comes  the  Apocalypse 
of  John. 

These  are  the  fountains  of  salvation,  where  the  thirst  of 
those  who  thirst  for  the  living  words  is  slaked.  Through 
these  alone  the  doctrine  of  faith  is  delivered.  Let  no  one 
add  to  them  or  take  from  them."  (Epist.  Fest.  XXXIX) 
There  is  an  air  of  security  in  these  words  that  indicates  that 
the  faith  of  the  Church  of  Christ  was  back  of  the  speaker. 
The  Canon  of  Athanasius  is  the  Canon  of  Trent,  because  the 
faith  of  the  Church  in  whose  name  he  spoke  was  the  same 
then  as  when  she  pronounced  her  definitive  decree. 

Cyril  of  Jerusalem  formulates  the  same  canon  with  the 
exclusion  of  the  Apocalypse,  (Cyril,  Cat.  IV.  36).  In  the 
fourth  century  this  book  encountered  severe  opposition  in  the 
East,  on  account  of  its  abuse  by  the  Chiliasts. 

St.  Epiphanius  enumerates  the  books  of  the  Canon :  The 
Four  Gospels,  the  fourteen  Epistles  of  Paul,  the  Acts  of  the 
Apostles,  the  seven  Catholic  Epistles,  and  the  Apocalypse. 
(Haer.  76) 

Gregory  of  Nazianzus  has  the  same  Canon,  with  the 
exception  of  the  Apocalypse,  which  is  placed  among  the 
books  that  are  not  authentic.     (P.  G.  41.  892.) 

The  Canon  of  Amphilochius  is  the  same.  He  defends 
the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  against  those  who  term  it  apoc- 
ryphal .     '  Tt  is , "  he  says ,  * ' verily  inspired . ' ' 

His  testimony  is  rather  unfavorable  for  the  Apocalypse, 
which  he  says  "is  judged  apocryphal  by  the  greater  num- 
ber."    (P.  G.  37,  1595-1598.) 

The  doubts  of  these  doctors  seem  to  have  regarded  more 
the  authorship  of  the  Apocalypse  than  its  divine  inspiration. 
It  was  an  echo  of  the  opinion  of  Dionysius  the  Great,  who 


THE   CANON   OF   N.   T.    AT   CLOSE   OF   III.    CENTURY      593 

called  in  question  not  the  divine  character  of  the  book,  but 
John's  authorship  of  it.  In  fact,  Gregory  of  Nazianzus,  St. 
Basil,  and  Gregory  of  Nyssa  have  employed  the  Apocalypse 
as  divine  Scripture. 

The  Council  of  Laodicea  in  its  sixtieth  Canon  receives  all 
our  books  except  the  Apocalypse  of  John.     (Mansi  II.  573.) 

No  clear  reference  is  found  in  the  works  of  John  Chrysos- 
tom  of  the  II.  and  III.  of  John,  the  II.  of  Peter,  the  Epistle 
of  Jude,  and  the  Apocalypse.  But  this  is  not  an  indication 
that  he  rejected  them.  It  was  due  to  the  minor  doctrinal 
importance  of  the  four.  Epistles  that  he  found  no  occasion  to 
employ  them,  and  most  probably  the  peculiar  mysterious 
character  of  the  Apocalypse  moved  him  to  seek  his  materials 
from  other  sources. 

His  temper  of  mind  always  favored  the  literal  interpreta- 
tion of  Scripture,  and  there  is  little  in  the  Apocalypse  that 
appeals  to  such  a  mind.  However,  Suidas  in  his  Lexicon,  at 
the  word  '\(odvv7}<;  declares  that  St.  John  received  the  Apoc- 
alypse as  canonical. 

In  the  works  of  St.  Ephrem  we  find  commentaries  on  all 
the  books  of  our  Canon  of  the  New  Testament.  He  seems 
to  have  paid  slight  heed  to  the  doubts  of  some  concerning 
the  Apocalypse.  As  St.  Ephrem  knew  not  Greek,  his  use  of 
all  the  books  is  an  evidence  that  they  then  existed  in  Syriac. 

The  testimony  of  the  four  great  Codices  is  favorable  to 
the  Catholic  Canon. 

Codex  ^,  of  Mt.  Sinai,  contains  all  the  books. 

Codex  B,  of  the  Vatican,  undoubtedly  did  contain  all  the 
books,  but  as  it  is  now  mutilated,  a  portion  of  Hebrews,  the 
Pastoral  Epistles,  and  the  Apocalypse  are  wanting. 

Codex  A,  Alexandrinus,  contains  all  the  books. 

The  palimpsest  Codex  C,  of  St.  Ephrem,  originally  con- 
tained all  the  books.* 

The  Bohairic  version  of  Scripture  contains  all  the  books 
of  the  Catholic  Canon.  The  Sahidic  version,  also,  though 
existing  now  only  in  fragments,  plainly  shows  that  it  con- 
tained the  same  Canon. 

*An  accurate  description  of  these  Codices  will  be   given    later  on  in 
this  work 


594        THE  CANON  OF  N.  T.  OF  W.   CENTURY 

The  same  Canon  is  found  in  the  Ethiopian  version,  and  in 
the  Armenian  version.  The  Peshitto,  as  it  exists  now  in  the 
Nestorian  Church,  contains  not  II.  Peter,  II.  and  III.  John, 
the  Epistle  of  Jude,  and  the  Apocalypse,  but  it  is  certain  that 
St.  Ephrem  recognized  these  books,  as  frequent  quotations 
from  all  of  them  are  found  in  his  works.  This  gives  us  cause 
to  suspect  that  the  Nestorians,  after  the  time  of  St.  Eph- 
rem, expunged  these  books  from  the  Canon  of  Scripture. 

In  the  Western  Church,  as  time  goes  on,  we  find  con- 
tinued evidences  that  the  Catholic  Canon  of  to-day  was  then 
the  practical  Canon  of  the  Church. 

Hilary  of  Poitiers  cites  Hebrews,  and  attributes  it  to 
Paul.  (De  Trin.  IV.  II.)  He  cites  also  II.  Peter  (De  Trin.  I. 
17),  and  the  Epistle  of  St.  James  (De  Trin.  IV.  8). 

Lucifer  of  Cagliari,  (t37i)  cites  the  Epistle  to  He- 
brews, and  the  Epistle  of  Jude  (De  non  conv.  cum.  Haer.  10, 
ed.  Hartel).* 

St.  Ambrose  (t397)  also  employs  often  in  his  works  the 
Epistle  of  the  Hebrews  and  the  Epistle  of  Jude. 

St.  Philastrius  of  BrescIa  (Haeres.  8S)  fonnulates 
this  Canon:  *Tt  has  been  established  by  the  Apostles  and 
their  succfessors,  that  nothing  should  be  read  in  the  Catholic 
Church  except  the  Law,  the  Prophets,  the  thirteen  Epistles 
of  Paul  and  the  seven  Catholic  Epistles."  The  omission  of 
Hebrews  and  the  Apocalypse  is  due  to  some  shade  of  doubt 
that  possessed  his  mind  at  that  time.  In  other  portions  of 
his  works  he  characterizes  as  heretics  those  who  do  not 
receive  the  Apocalypse  and  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews. f 

*Lucifer  was  Bishop  of  Cagliari,  metropolis  of  Sardinia,  about  the  mid- 
dle of  the  fourth  century.  He  vigorously  defended  Athanasius  in  his  com- 
bat against  Arianism,  and  for  this  was  exiled  by  the  Arian  Emperor,  Con- 
stance. In  his  exile,  he  wrote  his  work  against  Constance,  whereupon  the 
Emperor  sent  him  into  upper  Egypt.  After  the  death  of  Constance,  he 
was  recalled  by  Julian  in  361.  He  went  to  Antioch  where  the  church  was 
rent  by  the  dicussion  between  Paulinus  and  Meletius.  He  consecrated 
Paulinus  bishop  of  the  see,  and  thus  augmented  the  schism.  The  saddest 
act  in  his  whole  career  was  his  refusal  to  hold  communion  with  the  Pope 
after  his  restoration  of  the  fathers  of  the  Council  of  Rimini.  He  had  many 
followers  who  took  the  name  of  Luciferans.     He  died  in  371  at  Cagliari. 

tPhilaster  was  Bishop  of  Brescia  in  Italy,  about  the  3^ear  374.  He  was 
with  Ambrose  in  the  Council  of  Aquileia  in  38 1 .  His  death  is  placed  about 
the  year  387.  In  his  work  on  heresy  he  reveals  much  piety,  but  there  is 
there  great  lack  of  critique. 


THE    CANON   OF    N.    T.    OF   JEROME  595 

• 

RuFiNus  OF  Aquileia  (Expos.  Symbol.  37)  has  formu- 
lated the  complete  Catholic  Canon,  and  terminates  his  list 
with  these  words :  *  'These  are  the  books  which  the  Fathers 
have  placed  in  the  Canon,  and  upon  which  they  build  our 
faith." 

The  history  of  the  New  Testament  has  this  advantage 
over  that  of  the  Old  Testament,  that  it  has  not  St.  Jerome 
as  an  adversary.  The  works  of  Jerome  are  vast,  and  his 
references  to  the  New  Testament  many.  We  can  only 
adduce  here  some  representative  passages  to  show  forth 
what  was  his  mind  on  our  Canon.  In  his  Epistle  to  Paul- 
inus  (Migne,  Patrol.  Lat.  22,  548)  he  has  the  following  testi- 
mony: *T  will  touch  briefly  upon  the  New  Testament, 
Matthew,  Mark,  Luke  and  John,  the  'quadriga'  of  the  Lord 
and  the  true  Cherubim.  .  .  .  Paul  wrote  to  seven  Churches : 
the  eighth  to  the  Hebrews  is  placed  by  many  outside  the 
Canon.  He  exhorts  Timothy  and  Titus,  and  entreats  Phile- 
mon for  the  fugitive  slave  Onesimus.  .  .  .  The  Acts  of  the 
Apostles  seem  to  contain  but  dry  history,  and  to  portray  the 
infancy  of  the  Church,  but  when  we  know  that  the  writer  was 
Luke,  the  physician,  'whose  praise  was  in  the  Gospel,'  we 
will  understand  that  all  his  words  are  medicine  for  a  sick  soul. 
James,  Peter,  John,  and  Jude  wrote  seven  Epistles,  brief 
but  deep,  in  mystery;  brief  in  words,  but  long  in  the  sense, 
so  that  many  stumble  in  the  understanding  of  them.  The 
Apocalypse  contains  as  many  mysteries  as  words.  This  is 
insufficient  praise;  the  book  is  above  all  praise." 

Though  made  in  an  oratorical  way,  and  somewhat  lack- 
ing in  precision,  this  list  contains  Jerome's  views  on  the 
Canon.  He  receives  all  the  books,  but  records  the  doubts 
concerning  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews.  We  shall  now 
examine  a  few  special  references  in  the  works  of  Jerome  to 
the  books  of  the  New  Testament,  concerning  which  there 
existed  doubt. 

In  his  treatise  de  Viris  IllUvStribus  (Migne  Pat.  L.  23, 
615  Cap.  V.)  he  enumerates  Paul's  Epistles  thus:  "Paul 
wrote  nine  Epistles  to  seven  churches,  to  the  Romans  one, 
to  the  Corinthians  two,  to  the  Galatians  one,  to  the  Ephe- 
sians  one,  to  the  Philippians  one,  to  the  Colossians  one,  to  the 


596  THE    CANON   OF   N.   T.    OF  JEROME 

• 

Thessalonians  two,  and  besides  two  to  Timothy,  one  to 
Titus,  and  one  to  Philemon.  The  Epistle  which  is  styled, 
'To  the  Hebrews,'  is  not  believed  to  be  of  his  authorship,  on 
account  of  the  difference  in  style  and  diction.  By  Tertullian 
it  is  ascribed  to  Barnabas;  others  attribute  it  to  Luke  the 
Evangelist;  and  some  believe  it  to  be  of  Clement  of  Rome, 
afterwards  Pope,  who,  they  say,  was  associated  with  Paul, 
and  ordered  and  embellished  Paul's  teaching  in  his  own 
language,  or  to  speak  more  precisely,  since  Paul  wrote  to 
the  Hebrews,  and  on  account  of  their  hatred  of  his  name,  he 
omitted  it  in  the  salutation  in  the  beginning.  He  wrote  as  a 
Hebrew  in  Hebrew,  eloquently  in  his  own  tongue,  and  what 
was  eloquently  spoken  in  Hebrew,  was  more  eloquently 
translated  in  Greek,  and  for  this  cause  the  Epistle  differs 
from  the  other  Epistles  of  Paul." 

Jerome  estimated  the  thought  of  the  Eastern  world 
above  that  of  the  Western.  The  doubts  concerning  Hebrews 
were  nearly  all  centered  in  the  West,  and  moved  him  little. 
Though  he  is  ready  to  adopt  any  plausible  theory  to  explain 
the  absence  of  the  Pauline  style  in  Hebrews,  he,  in  no 
imcertain  terms,  vindicates  to  Paul  the  formal  creation  of 
the  work. 

In  his  Epistle  to  Dardanus  (Migne,  22,  1103),  he  is  even 
more  explicit  in  favor  of  the  Hebrews.  "The  Epistle  which 
is  entitled:  To  the  Hebrews,  is  received  as  the  Epistle  of 
Paul,  not  only  by  all  the  churches  of  the  Orient,  but  also  by 
all  the  Greek  writers  up  to  the  present  time ;  although  many 
claim  that  the  words  were  written  by  Barnabas  or  Clement. 
It  matters  not  who  the  writer  was,  since  he  was  an  ecclesias- 
tical man,  and  the  Epistle  is  promulgated  by  the  daily  read- 
ing of  the  churches.  And  if  the  Latin  usage  does  not  receive 
it  among  the  canonical  Scriptures,  neither  do  the  Greek 
churches  receive  the  Apocalypse  with  full  sanction ;  but  we 
receive  them  both,  following  not  the  usage  of  our  time,  but 
the  authority  of  the  old  writers." 

Jerome  has  exaggerated  the  doubts  of  the  Western 
Church  in  regard  to  Hebrews.  It  was  received  by  that 
Church,  and  the  doubts  were  only  scattering  and  individual. 
No  doubt  had  properly  invaded  the  corporate  belief  of  the 


THE  CANON  OF  N.  T.  OF  JEROME  597 

Church.  Jerome  rises  above  these  doubts,  and  receives  the 
book  on  the  warrant  of  tradition  and  the  usage  of  the  Church. 
Wherever  he  mentions  elsewhere  in  his  works  these  doubts, 
it  is  simply  to  historically  state  that  which  he  did  not  per- 
sonally entertain. 

In  his  Commentary  on  Ezekiel,  VIII.  (Migne,  25,  1465), 
he  introduces  a  quotation  from  Hebrews,  with  the  remark: 
*'If,  in  receiving  the  Epistle,  the  Latin  people  do  not  reject 
the  authority  of  the  Greeks."  I  believe  this  to  be  a  rhetori- 
cal figure  to  belittle  the  importance  of  the  occasional  doubts 
of  the  West.  It  was  equivalent  to  saying:  Against  the 
few  doubts  of  the  West  is  arrayed  the  authority  of  the  whole 
Greek  world. 

Jerome  also  records  a  doubt  which  regarded  not  the 
divine  character,  but  the  authorship  of  II.  Peter.  'Teter," 
he  says,  "wrote  two  Epistles  which  are  called  Catholic.  The 
second  of  these  is  not  believed  to  be  his  by  many,  on  account 
of  its  difference  from  the  first  in  style."  The  statement  of 
Jerome's  own  views  is  clear  enough,  namely,  that  Peter 
wrote  two  Epistles ;  but  it  was  inexact  to  say  that  many  re- 
jected the  second.  The  doubt  of  Peter's  authorship  of  the 
Second  Epistle  only  existed  in  some  Greek  churehes,  who 
strove  thus  to  justify  its  omission  from  their  incomplete 
Canon. 

In  his  Epistle  to  Hedibia,  (Migne,  22,  1002)  he  sets  at 
naught  this  doubt,  and  ascribes  the  difference  in  style  to  dif- 
ferent amanuenses:  "The  two  Epistles  ascribed  to  Peter 
differ  in  tenor  and  style,  whence  we  understand  that  he  used 
different  scribes." 

In  the  before-mentioned  treatise,  De  Viris  Illustribus,  II. 
(Migne,  P.  L.  23,  607),  Jerome  delivers  the  following  testi- 
mony concerning  the  Epistle  of  James:  "James,  who  is 
called  the  brother  of  the  Lord,  wrote  one  Epistle  which  is 
one  of  the  seven  Catholic  Epistles.  It  is  said  that  it  was 
published  under  his  name  by  another,  and  that  gradually, 
with  the  course  of  time,  it  acquired  authority."  The  evi- 
dent reason  why  Jerome  does  not  deal  with  the  opinion  which 
he  here  notices  is  that  it  left  intact  the  divine  inspiration  of 
the  book. 


598  CANON  OF  N.  T.  FROM  END  OF  IV.  TO  XV.  CENTURY 

In  Op.  cit.  (Migne,  23,  613)  he  makes  a  similar  state- 
ment respecting  Jude's  Epistle:  "J^<i^»  "the  brother  of 
James,  left  a  short  Epistle,  which  is  one  of  the  Catholic 
Epistles.  For  the  reason  that  he  employs  a  testimony  from 
the  Apocryphal  book  of  Henoch,  it  is  rejected  by  many,  but 
it  has  merited  authority  by  its  antiquity  and  usage  (in  the 
Church),  and  is  reckoned  among  the  Holy  Scriptures." 
There  is  a  lack  of  precision,  a  lack  of  critical  weighing  of 
data,  in  these  testimonies  that  has  drawn  from  the  Bolland- 
ists  the  just  declaration:  "II  convient  le  peser  avec  la  defi- 
ance que  doit  inspirer  un  ecrivain  qui  se  montre  plut6t  pub- 
liciste  de  talent,  ecrivant  au  courant  de  la  plume  qu'  his- 
torien  consciencieux." 

In  the  same  work,  (Migne  P.  L.  23,  623,  637),  Jerome 
inserts  a  loose  testimony  concerning  the  Epistle  of  St.  John: 
"John  .  .  .  has  written  one  Epistle  which  is  approved  by 
all  the  ecclesiastical  writers  and  learned  men.  The  two 
others  are  attributed  to  John  the  Ancient,  of  whom  they 
show  the  tomb  at  Ephesus,  distinct  from  that  of  the  Apostle, 
although  others  believe  that  both  monuments  belong  to  the 
Evangelist."  As  we  have  said  before,  these  theories  in  the 
mind  of  Jerome  left  intact  the  divinity  of  the  books.  He 
separated  the  authorship  of  the  books  from  their  inspiration. 
He  accepted  their  inspiration  on  the  warrant  of  the  Church ; 
the  other  question  interested  him  but  little.  He  was  willing 
to  record  every  legend  concerning  it,  and  suspend  judgment. 
Much  of  Jerome's  erudition  is  crude  and  uncritical. 

Traces  of  the  last  mentioned  opinion  of  Jerome  are  found 
in  the  Decree  of  Gelasius.  That  decree  contains  all  the 
books  of  the  Catholic  Canon,  although  the  II.  and  III.  of 
John  are  in  some  manuscripts  ascribed  to  John  the  Ancient. 
Its  evidential  force  is  independent  of  this  detail,  for  it 
plainly  receives  all  the  books  as  divine  Scripture. 

The  Canon  of  Pope  Innocent  sent  to  Exuperius  is 
identical  with  the  Canon  of  the  Council  of  Trent. 

We  have  before  adduced  the  Canon  of  St.  Augustine 
(Christian  Doctrine,  Chap.  VIII.)  which  also  is  identical 
with  that  of  the  Council  of  Trent.  He  was  not  ignorant  of 
the  scattering  doubts  in  the  Western  Church.     'The  Epistle 


CANON  OF  N.  T.  FROM  END  OF  IV.  TO  XV.  CENTURY  599 

to  the  Hebrews/'  he  says  "has  been  doubted  by  some;  but  I 
prefer  to  follow  the  authority  of  the  Eastern  churches  which 
receive  it  as  canonical."     (Migne,  P.  L.  44,  137). 

The  authority  of  St.  Augustine  is  not  shaken  by  the  least 
shadow  of  doubt.  He  received  all  the  books  as  divinely 
inspired  Scripture. 

The  three  African  Councils  held  in  393,  397,  and  419, 
formulated  a  canon  identical  in  substance  with  that  of  the 
Council  of  Trent. 

In  the  writings  of  representative  men  of  the  churches  of 
Gaul  and  Spain  of  that  period,  we  always  find  evidences  of 
the  complete  Canon.  Thus  we  see  that  at  the  end  of  the 
fourth  century,  all  the  great  churches  of  the  world  possessed 
complete  Canons.  Some  of  the  books  had  entered  into  their 
estate  easier  than  others,  but  the  energy  of  the  divine  char- 
acter finally  placed  there  those  which,  considered  from  a 
doctrinal  standpoint,  were  unimportant. 

It  is  needless  to  attempt  to  record  the  data  of  the  follow- 
ing centuries  in  favor  of  these  books.  The  whole  Christian 
world  was  unanimous  in  adopting  them.  The  Syriac  Ver- 
sion made  in  the  sixth  century  contains  them  all.  The 
Council  in  Trullo  which  is  authority  for  the  Greeks  approved 
them  all.  In  the  West,  the  Bible  of  Cassiodorus  contains  all 
the  books.  The  great  doctors  of  the  Latin  Church  are 
unanimous  in  receiving  the  complete  Canon.  In  fact  the 
complete  Canon  enjoyed  a  period  of  undisturbed  peace  up  to 
the  fifteenth  century. 

We  have  before  mentioned  the  peculiar  views  on  the 
Canon  held  by  John  of  Salisbury.  His  views  on  the  New 
Testament  are  also  strange.  "The  Epistles  of  Paul,"  he 
says,  "are  fifteen,  comprised  in  one  volume,  although  the 
common  and  almost  universal  opinion  is  that  there  are  only 
fourteen,  ten  to  the  churches,  and  four  to  individuals,  if  the 
Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  is  to  be  enumerated  with  the  Epistles 
of  Paul,  which  the  doctor  of  doctors,  Jerome,  endeavors  to 
prove  in  his  Preface,  where  he  refutes  the  cavils  of  those 
who  contend  that  it  was  not  of  Paul.  The  fifteenth  is  that 
written  to  the  Church  at  Laodicea,  and  although,  as  Jerome 
says,  it  is  rejected  by  all,  nevertheless  it  was  written  by  the 


600  THE    CANON    OF   N.    T.    OF    CAJETAN 

Apostle.  Neither  is  this  judgment  founded  on  the  opinion 
of  others,  but  rests  on  the  testimony  of  the  Apostle  who 
makes  mention  of  such  Epistle,  in  his  Epistle  to  the 
Colossians." 

The  uncritical  mind  of  Salisbury  failed  to  advert  that  his 
argument  does  not  conclude.  Paul  wrote  a  letter  to  the 
Church  of  Laodicea,  but  that  fact  can  not  be  alleged  to  prove 
that  the  letter  of  which  Salisbury  spoke  was  that  letter  of 
Paul.   Salisbury  had  no  followers ;  his  opinion  died  with  him. 

Toward  the  middle  of  the  fifteenth  century  PopE  Eugene 
IV.,  in  his  Bull  of  Union  with  the  Jacobites,  enumerated  the 
complete  Canon  of  all  our  books  as  the  Holy  Scriptures.  The 
definition  awakened  no  word  of  discussion,  for  it  was  but  pro- 
mulgating in  official  form  what  the  whole  Christian  world 
believed. 

In  the  general  upheaval  of  the  settled  status  of  things, 
which  came  with  the  great  apostasy  of  the  sixteenth  century, 
doubt  and  error  also  invaded  the  thought  of  the  age  con- 
cerning Holy  Scripture. 

In  the  first  edition  of  his  Greek  New  Testament,  which 
he  dedicated  to  Leo  X.,  Erasmus  outlined  certain  doubts 
concerning  the  authorship  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  the 
Epistle  of  St.  James,  II.  Peter,  II.  and  III.  John,  and  the 
Apocalypse.  The  faculty  of  the  Sorbonne  rose  up  against 
him  and  censured  him.  One  must  confess,  however,  that 
the  arguments  of  the  Sorbonne  are  not  conclusive,  and  their 
action  inconsiderate. 

Erasmus  protested  that  he  held  to  the  divinity  of  the 
books;  he  only  doubted  of  the  authors.  'There  has  always 
been  doubt,"  he  says,  ''regarding  the  author  of  Hebrews; 
and  I  confess  candidly  that  I  doubt  yet."  The  faculty 
responded  by  affixing  to  the  opinion  the  note  of  temerity 
and  schism.  Erasmus  appealed  to  history.  "Doubt  was 
entertained  for  a  long  time,"  he  says,  "regarding  the  Apoc- 
alypse, not  by  heretics,  but  by  orthodox  men,  who,  though 
uncertain  of  the  author,  received  the  book  as  coming  from 
the  Holy  Ghost."  Though  Erasmus  adduces  here  a  fact, 
he  does  not  deal  justly  thereby.  The  mere  fact  that  cer- 
tain scattering  doubts  arose  in  some  churches  concerning  the 


THE    CANON   OF    N.    T.    OF    CAJETAN  601 

author  of  this  book  was  not  sufficient  data  to  cast  a  doubt 
upon  its  author.  The  Sorbonne  would  have  acted  more 
wisely  in  pointing  out  the  weakness  of  the  great  humanist's 
position  than  in  condemning  him  in  toto  for  that  which 
was  more  against  a  sound  critique  than  against  faith. 

Erasmus  at  length  sent  to  the  faculty  the  following 
response,  which  does  honor  to  the  man :  "According  to  the 
mind  of  man,  I  believe  not  that  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews 
is  of  Paul,  or  of  Luke,  nor  that  II.  Peter  is  of  the  Apostle, 
nor  the  Apocalypse  of  John.  .  .  .  Only  this  doubt  holds  my 
mind,  whether  the  Church  receives  the  titles  of  the  books,  so 
that  she  not  only  bids  us  hold  as  infallible  what  is  written  in 
the  books,  but  also  commands  us  to  hold  as  infallible  that 
the  books  came  from  the  authors  whose  names  they  bear.  If 
she  has  canonized  the  titles,  I  renounce  my  doubt.  A  clear 
judgment  of  the  Church  moves  me  more  than  all  the  argu- 
ments of  men." 

Issues  are  mixed  here.  The  Church  has  certainly  canon- 
ized some  titles,  and  some  she  has  not.  But  regarding  the 
books  of  which  Erasmus  spoke,  the  mind  of  the  Church  is 
now  clear,  since  she  mentioned  them  in  the  decree  of  Trent 
as  belonging  to  their  respective  authors. 

The  most  notable  opposition  to  the  antilegomena  in  this 
period  came  from  Cajetan.* 

*Thomas  de  Vio  is  sumamed  Cajetanus,  from  the  village  of  Gaeta  or 
Cajeta,  in  the  old  kingdom  of  Naples,  where  he  was  bom  on  the  20th  of 
February,  1469.  At  the  age  of  fifteen,  he  entered  the  Dominican  order. 
He  studied  theology  at  Bologna,  and  made  brilliant  progress  in  the  sacred 
sciences.  He  took  the  degree  of  doctor  of  theology  in  a  general  assembly 
of  the  order  held  at  Ferrara,  in  1494.  He  taught  theology  for  some  years 
at  Brescia,  Pa  via,  and  at  Rome.  In  1500  he  was  made  procurator  general ; 
and  in  1508,  General  of  the  Order  by  the  express  recommendation  of  Julius 
II.  In  1 5 17  he  was  created  Cardinal  by  Leo  X.,  and  soon  after  was  sent 
by  the  Pope  into  Germany  to  move  the  Emperor  Maximillian  against  the 
Turks,  and  to  make  head  against  Luther,  In  the  latter  project,  he  was 
entirely  unsuccessful.  In  fact  it  seems  unfortunate  that  Cajetan  should 
have  been  selected  for  this  mission.  He  was  but  the  echo  of  the  excessive- 
ly elaborate  speculativism  of  the  scholastics.  It  required  living  thought, 
the  comprehension  by  a  master  mind  of  the  peculiar  causes  that  were 
influencing  men 's  minds,  to  stop  the  tide  of  that  dreadful  sea  which  broke 
over  Europe  through  the  breach  made  by  Luther 's  defection .  A  man 
like  Philip  Neri  would  have  accomplished  more  by  his  clear  call  to  the 
supernatural  than  the   subtle   dialectician. 


602  THE    CANON    OF    N.    T.    OF    CAJETAN 

We  have  before  reviewed  his  position  on  the  deuterocan- 
onical  books  of  the  Old  Testament.  His  views  on  the  anti- 
legomena  are  focalized  in  the  following  statement:  ''From 
these  and  other  words  of  Jerome,  the  prudent  reader  will 
know  that  Jerome  was  not  absolutely  certain  of  the  author 
of  this  Epistle,  and  since  we  have  taken  Jerome  for  our  rule, 
lest  we  should  err  in  the  discernment  of  the  canonical  books, 
and  those  which  he  delivered  to  be  canonical,  we  hold  can- 
onical, and  those  which  he  cut  off  from  the  Canon,  we  place 
outside  the  Canon;  therefore,  from  the  fact  that  the  author 
of  this  Epistle  is  doubtful  with  Jerome,  the  Epistle  becomes 
doubtful,  for  if  it  be  not  of  Paul,  it  is  not  clear  that  it  is  can- 
In  1 5 19  Cajetan  was  made  Bishop  of  Gaeta.  After  several  other  mis- 
sions in  state  affairs,  in  1523  he  fixed  his  domicile  at  Rome,  and  devoted 
his  life  to  the  study  of  theology  and  the  Holy  Scriptures.  In  dogmatic 
theology,  Cajetan  was  an  absolute  "Thomist";  in  Scripture,  an  absolute 
"Jeromist."  This  led  to  a  sort  of  disdain  for  all  the  resources  of  sacred 
science  outside  the  writings  of  these  alone.  This  led  him  to  enunciate 
many  strange  and  dangerous  opinions,  especially  in  regard  to  the  Scrip- 
tures. There  is  in  his  works  a  certain  display  of  arrogance  in  the  way  he 
essays  to  solve  every  question  by  his  understanding  of  those  two  doctors. 
In  1527  Rome  was  taken  by  the  army  of  the  Emperor,  and  Cajetan 
was  made  prisoner.  He  regained  his  liberty  only  by  a  ransom  of  fifty 
thousand  Roman  crowns.  The  remaining  j^ears  of  his  life  were  conse- 
crated to  study  till  his  death  in  1534. 

Cajetan  is  undoubtedly  the  greatest  commentator  of  the  Summa  Theo- 
logica  of  St.  Thomas.  This  is  also  the  greatest  of  his  works.  He  com- 
mented all  the  Old  Testament,  except  the  Canticle  of  Canticles  and  the 
Prophets.  He  has  a  commentary  on  the  first  three  chapters  of  Isaiah. 
He  commented  all  the  New  Testament,  except  the  Apocalypse.  His 
method  was  to  bring  out  the  literal  sense,  and  for  this  cause  he  declared 
himself  unable  to  explain  the  Apocalypse.  Cajetan 's  disregard  for  the 
Fathers,  Jerome  excepted,  appears  in  his  statement  that  one  may  hold 
that  which  is  not  contrary  to  the  express  doctrine  of  the  Church,  even 
"against  a  torrent  of  holy  doctors. ' '  (Praef.  in  Lib.  Moysis.).  It  would 
be  better  to  deny  even  the  supposition  of  Cajetan  on  this  point. 

The  Dominican  Catharinus  moved  the  Sorbonne  to  censure  sixteen 
propositions  taken  from  Cajetan 's  commentaries  on  the  Gospels.  After 
Cajetan 's  death  the  same  Catharinus  wrote  a  work  filled  with  bitter  criti- 
cism and  severe  accusations  against  him. 

Melchior  Canus  also  attacks  Cajetan  in  his  celebrated  work  De  Locis 
Theologicis.  He  has  been  defended  by  Sixtus  Sennensis,  and  by  Richard 
Simon.  Though  the  errors  of  Cajetan  were  not  formal,  it  must  be  held 
in  truth  that  his  works  on  Scripture  are  defective  in  many  places,  and  his 
temper  of  mind  is  far  from  laudable 


THE   CANON   OF   N.    T.    OF   CAJETAN  603 

onical.  Wherefore,  from  the  authority  of  this  Epistle  alone, 
questions  of  faith  cannot  be  decided . ' ' 

Regarding  Jude's  Epistle  he  says :  ''From  which  things 
(the  statements  of  St.  Jerome)  it  appears  that  the  Epistle  is 
inferior  in  authority  to  Holy  Scripture."  He  repeats  in 
effect  this  statement  in  regard  to  11.  and  III.  John  and  the 
Epistle  of  James.  He  says  naught  of  the  Apocalypse,  but 
he  defends  the  canonicity  of  H.  Peter.  In  regard  to  this 
Epistle,  there  was  no  choice  between  authenticity  and  a  liter- 
ary forgery,  for  the  author  claims  to  be  Peter.  (II.  Peter,  I. 
i).  Cajetan  shrank  from  characterizing  a  book,  which  the 
Church  had  used  for  centuries,  as  a  literary  fraud. 

In  examining  the  testimonies  of  Cajetan,  we  find  him  more 
of  a  "Jeromist"  than  Jerome  himself.  Jerome  had  noted 
certain  doubts  regarding  the  antilegomena,  but  he  had  never 
admitted  that  the  books  were  of  doubtful  inspiration.  The 
great  doctor  rightly  separated  the  question  of  authorship 
from  that  of  divinity.  He  incidentally  mentioned  doubts 
regarding  the  former  question,  the  other  question  with  him 
was  fixed  and  sure.  It  is  a  lamentable  lack  of  logic  in  Caje- 
tan's  reasoning  to  say,  that  if  the  author  of  a  book  be  uncer- 
tain, the  book  itself  is  of  inferior  authority.  The  two  ques- 
tions were  distinct  in  Jerome's  time,  and  in  Cajetan's  time. 

The  prerogative  given  to  Jerome  by  Cajetan  in  the  matter 
of  the  Canon  is  absurd.  The  Church,  and  the  Church  alone 
merits  such  authority.  The  whole  testimony  is  like  much 
that  Cajetan  wrote,  an  intense  expression  of  himself.  He 
had  a  perfect  confidence  in  his  heroes  and  himself,  he  cared 
little  for  what  other  men  thought. 

It  is  generally  stated  that  the  opinion  of  Cajetan  was  one 
of  the  disposing  causes  which  drew  from  the  Church  the  de- 
fined Canon  of  the  Scriptures.  The  protestants  had  already 
set  forth  similar  views  in  Germany.  The  great  credit  of 
Cajetan  would  tend  to  draw  Catholics  towards  the  new 
opinions.  The  juncture  had  come  for  the  Church  to  act,  and 
she  in  her  Decree  of  Trent  defined  the  faith  which  she  had 
held  from  the  beginning:  "The  books  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment are  the  four  Gospels,  of  Matthew,  Mark,  Luke  and  John : 
the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  written  by  Luke:  the  fourteen 


604     THE  CANON  OF  N.  T.  OF  COUNCIL  OF  TRENT 

Epistles  of  the  Apostle  Paul,  viz.,  Romans,  two  to  the  Cor- 
inthians, Galatians,  Ephesians,  Philippians,  Colossians,  two 
to  the  Thessalonians,  two  to  Timothy,  one  to  Titus,  one  to 
Philemon,  and  one  to  the  Hebrews ;  two  Epistles  to  Peter  the 
Apostle,  three  Epistles  of  John  the  Apostle,  one  of  James  the 
Apostle,  one  of  Jude  the  Apostle,  and  the  Apocalypse  of 
John  the  Apostle.  If  any  man  will  not  receive  as  sacred 
and  canonical  all  these  books  entire,  with  all  their  parts,  as 
they  have  been  wont  to  be  read  in  the  Catholic  Church,  and 
as  they  exist  in  the  old  Latin  Edition  of  the  Vulgate,  .  .  . 
letJiim  be  anathema."     (Council  of  Trent,  Sess.  IV.) 

In  the  Council  of  Trent,  the  discussion  of  the  Canon  of  the 
New  Testament  was  less  extensive  and  intense,  than  that 
which  had  come  upon  the  Canon  of  the  Old  Testament. 
Not  a  voice  opposed  the  canonicity  of  the  antilegomena  of 
the  New  Testament ;  Luther  and  his  supporters  were  recog- 
nized as  their  sole  opponents. 

Regarding  the  last  verses  of  the  Gospel  of  Mark;  Luke's 
account  of  the  sweat  of  the  Lord  in  Gethsemane ;  and  the 
section  relating  to  the  adulteress  in  the  Gospel  of  John, 
some  discussion  was  moved.  Cardinal  Pacheco  demanded 
in  the  general  assembly  of  the  Council  on  the  27th  of  March, 
that  these  portions  should  be  expressly  indicated  in  the 
decree.  Cajetan  had  placed  that  the  final  verses  of  Mark 
were  of  less  authority  in  matters  of  faith.  (Mark.  XVI.  9- 
20). 

The  Fathers  believed  that  it  was  inopportune  to  even 
notice  the  doubts  concerning  these  passages.  The  question 
was  put  to  vote  whether  express  mention  should  be  made  of 
these  passages,  and  it  was  decided  in  the  negative  by  thirty- 
four  votes  against  seventeen.  Some  discussion  followed 
till  finally  the  point  raised  by  Pacheco  was  safeguarded  by 
the  clause:  ''the  books  with  all  their  parts." 

The  next  point  of  discussion  regarded  the  authors  of 
the  books. 

The  question  was  submitted :  Whether  the  books  should 
be  received  together  with  the  authors.  Forty-four  of  the 
assembly  voted  on  the  ist  of  April,  that  the  authors  should 
be  received  as  well  as  the  books. 


THE    NEW   TESTAMENT    OF   THE   SECTS  605 

In  consequence  of  this  the  schema  was  modified,  so  that 
the  author  of  every  book  of  the  New  Testament  is  most 
clearly  mentioned  with  the  respective  books.  Hence  the 
question  which  had  been  open  up  to  that  time  was  settled. 

Chapter  XIII. 
The  New  Testament  of  the  Sects. 

The  Canon  of  the  schismatic  Greek  Church  is  the  same  as 
that  of  the  Roman  Catholic  Church. 

In  Syria,  the  Nestorians  receive  only  the  Gospels,  the 
Acts,  Fourteen  Epistles  of  Paul,  I.  Peter,  I.  John,  and  the 
Epistle  of  James.  Ebed  Jesu,  the  Nestorian  Metropolitan 
of  Nisibe,  (fisiS),  does  not  mention  the  four  shorter  Catho- 
lic Epistles  and  Apocalypse  in  his  catalogue  of  the  New 
Testament. 

The  schismatic  Armenians  receive  all  our  books,  and 
add  two  letters  of  the  Corinthians  to  Paul,  and  Paul's  re- 
sponse. 

The  Ethiopian  Canon  contains  all  the  books,  and  adds 
the  Apostolical  Constitutions. 

Calvin  and  his  sect  received  the  full  Canon. 

The  Anglican  Church  also  received  all  the  books  of  the 
Catholic  Canon. 

In  the  Lutheran  Church  there  was  much  fluctuation  of 
opinion.  Luther  had  doubted  of  the  Epistles  of  James 
Jude,  Hebrews  and  the  Apocalypse;  his  followers  went 
farther,  and  rejected  II.  Peter,  and  II.  and  III.  John.  But 
the  Lutherans  were  not  constant  in  this  opinion.  The  lack 
of  support  of  the  other  sects,  and  the  feebleness  of  their 
position  brought  it  about  that  Bossuet  was  able  to  write  in 
1700  to  Leibnitz:  "Nous  convenons  tous  ensemble,  protest- 
ants  et  catholiques,  egalement  des  memes  livres  du  Nouveau 
Testament ;  car  je  ne  crois  pas  que  personne  volut  suivre 
encore  les  emportements  de  Luther  contre  I'Epitre  de  saint 
Jacques.  Passions  done  une  meme  canonicite  a  tous  ces 
livres,  contestes  autrefois  ou  non  contestes ;  apres  cela,  Mon- 
sieur permettez  moi  de  vous  demander  si  vous  voulez  afifai- 
blir  I'autorite  ou  de  I'Epitre  aux  Hebreux,  si  haute,  si  th^o- 


606  THE   APOCRYPHA   OF   BOTH   TESTAMENTS 

logique,  si  divine,  ou  celle  de  TApQcalypse,  ou  reluit  Tesprit 
prophetique  avec  autant  de  magnificence  que  dans  Isaie  et 
dans  Daniel?" 

The  Lutherans  have  abandoned  their  theory,  but  in 
many  of  their  Bibles  the  preface  of  Luther  was  long  after 
printed.  It  is  for  this  cause  that  Richard  Simon  ridicules 
them  for  such  an  apparent  contradiction.  Finally,  these 
prefaces  were  expunged,  and  the  opinions  of  their  founder 
on  this  point  consigned  to  oblivion. 

The  rise  of  rationalism  has  changed  the  estate  of  the 
books  of  both  Testaments  in  the  protestant  church.  It  is 
now  no  longer  a  question  of  the  divinity  of  any  particular 
book,  but  belief  in  the  divinity  of  the  whole  collection  is 
fast  dying  in  all  the  sects. 

Chapter  XIV. 

The  Apocryphal  and  lost  books  of  both 

Testaments. 

The  radical  signification  of  apocryphal  a7roV/3u</)09  from 
aTro/cpvTTTeiv^  is  that  of  hidden. 

In  our  judgment  the  first  signification  of  the  term  as 
applied  to  our  books,  was  to  denote  that  the  origin  and 
authorship  of  the  book  were  unknown.  By  its  etymological 
force  it  would  extend  to  all  books  of  unknown  authorship. 
But  language  is  a  living  growth,  and  can  not  be  bound  by 
etymology. 

The  books  which,  though  of  an  uncertain  author,  were 
certainly  of  an  inspired  author,  were  thus  preserved  immune 
from  this  appellation.  So  that  the  term  became  exclusively 
applied  to  books  whose  real  character  was  hidden. 

At  all  events  the  use  of  the  term  to-day  is  to  signify  a 
book  which  by  its  title  seems  to  lay  claim  to  divinity,  but 
which  has  no  sufficient  data  to  substantiate  this  claim. 
Perhaps  we  could  not  better  the  definition  of  Origen :  ''Books 
which  were  produced  under  the  names  of  the  saints  (biblical 
personages),  but  which  are  outside  the  Canon." 

Not  all  the  Apocrypha  are  of  the  same  character.  Some 
are  impious ;  others  are  composed  of  legends  and  pious  reflec- 
tions intended  for  the  edification  of  the  faithful. 


THE   APOCRYPHA    OF    BOTH    TESTAMENTS  607 

The  Apocrypha  are  of  two  great  classes,  those  of  the  Old 
Testament,  and  those  of  the  New.  We  know  from  the  testi- 
monies of  the  Fathers  that  a  vast  multitude  of  Apocrypha 
existed  in  the  early  ages  of  the  Church.  The  pious  fictions 
of  Christians,  the  fictions  of  the  Jews,  and  the  forgeries  of  the 
heretics  conspired  to  augment  the  number. 

The  first  official  enumeration  of  the  Apocrypha  is  in  the 
following  Canon  of  Gelasius,  sanctioned  in  a  council  at 
Rome  in  495-496. 

List  of  apocryphal  books  which  are  not  received 

The  Itinerary  under  name  of  Peter  the  Apostle,  which  is  entitled  of 
Clement,  eight  books,  apocryphal. 

The  Acts  of  Andrew  the  Apostle,  apocryphal. 

The  Acts  of  Thomas  the  Apostle,  apocryphal. 

The  Acts  of  Peter  the  Apostle,  apocryphal. 

The  Acts  of  Philip  the  Apostle,  apocryphal. 

The  Acts  of  Thaddseus  the  Apostle,  apocryphal. 

The  Gospel  of  Thaddseus,  apocryphal. 

The  Gospel  of  Mathias,  apocryphal. 

The  Gospel  of  Peter  the  Apostle,  apocryphal. 

The  Gospel  of  James  the  Apostle,  apocryphal. 

The  Gospel  of  Barnabas,  apocryphal. 

The  Gospel  of  Thomas,  used  by  the  Manicheans,  apocryphal. 

The  Gospel  of  Bartholomew  the  Apostle,  apocryphal. 

The  Gospel  of  Andrew  the  Apostle,  apocryphal. 

The  Gospel  corrupted  by  Lucian,  apocryphal. 

The  Book  of  the  Infancy  of  the  Saviour,  apocryphal. 

The  Gospels  corrupted  by  Hesychius,  apocryphal. 

The  Book  of  the  Nativity  of  the  Lord  and  Mary  and  the  Wise  Woman, 
apocryphal. 

The  Book  called  Pastor,  apocryphal. 

All  the  books  made  by  Lucius,  the  disciple  of  the  devil,  apocryphal. 

The  Book  called  The  Foundation,  apocryphal. 

The  Book  called  The  Treasure,  apocryphal. 

The  Book  of  the  Daughters  of  Adam,  or  the  Little  Genesis,  apocry- 
phal. 

The  Book  called  the  Acts  of  Thecla  and  Paul,  apocryphal. 

The  Book  called  of  Nepos,  apocryphal. 

The  Book  of  Proverbs,  written  by  heretics,  and  circulated  under  the 
name  of  S.  Sixtus,  apocryphal. 

The  Apocalypse,  which  bears  the  name  of  Paul  the  Apostle,  apocryphal. 

The  Apocalypse  which  bears  the  name" of  Thomas  the  Apostle,  apocry- 
phal. 

The  Apocalypse  which  bears  the  name  of  Stephen  the  Apostle,  apocry- 
phal. 

The  Book  called  "Transitus",  that  is  the  Assumption  of  the  Blessed 
Virgin  Mary,  apocryphal. 

The  Book  called  the  Penance  of  Adam,  apocryphal. 


608  THE  APOCRYPHA   OF   BOTH   TESTAMENTS 

The  Book  of  Ogias,  who  is  supposed  by  the  heretics  to  have  combated 

with  the  dragon  after  the  deluge,  apocryphal. 
The  Book  called  the  Testament  of  Job,  apocryphal. 
The  Book  called  the  Penance  of  Origen,  apocryphal. 
The  Book  called  the  Penance  of  St.  Cyprian,  apocryphal. 
The  Book  called  the  Penance  of  Jamne  and  Mambre,  apocryphal. 
The  Book  called  The  Lots  of  the  Holy  Apostles,  apocryphal. 
The  Book  called  The  Praise  of  the  Apostles,  apocryphal. 
The  Book  called  The  Canons  of  the  Apostles,  apocryphal. 
The  Letter  of  Jesus  to  King  Abgar,  apocryphal. 
The  Letter  of  Abgar  to  Jesus,  apocryphal, 
.The  Book  called  The  Contradiction  of  Solomon,  apocryphal.     (Mansi. 

Coll.  Cone.  Tom.  VIII. 

A  minor  list  of  apocryphal  books  appears  in  the  works  of 
Nicephorus,  Patriarch  of  Constantinople  (1828). 

Psalms  and  Canticles  of  Solomon,  2,100  verses. 
Apocalypse  of  Peter,  300  verses. 
Epistle  of  Barnabas.  1,360  verses. 
Gospel  according  to  the  Hebrews,  2,200  verses. 
Henoch,  4,800  verses. 
The  Patriarchs,  5,100  verses. 
The  Prayer  of  Joseph,  1,100  verses. 
The  Testament  of  Moses,  1,100  verses. 
The  Assumption  of  Moses,  1,400  verses. 
Abraham,  300  verses. 
Eldad  and  Modad,  400  verses. 
Elias,  the  Prophet,  316  verses. 
Sophonias,  the  Prophet,  600  verses. 
Zachary,  the  father  of  John,  500  verses. 
Baruch,  Habacuc,  Ezechiel,  and  Daniel,  Pseudepigrapha. 
The  Itinerary  of  Peter,  2,750  verses. 
The  Itinerary  of  John,  2,600  verses. 
The  Itinerary  of  Thomas,  1,700  verses. 
The  Gospel  of  Thomas,  1,300  verses. 
The  Doctrine  of  the  Apostles,  200  verses. 
The  I.  and  II.  Epistle  of  Clement,  2,600  verses. 
Ignatius,  Polycarp,  and  the  Pastor,  of  Hermas. —  (Opusc.  Hist.  ed. 
Boor.) 

A  list  of  apocryphal  books  published  from  different 
manuscripts  by  Montfaucon,  Cotelier,  Hody  and  Pitra  con- 
tains the  following : 

Adam.  Apocalypse  of  Ezra. 

Henoch.  History  of  James. 

Lamech.  Apocalypse  of  Peter. 

Patriarchs.  Voyage  and  Doctrine  of  the  Apos- 

Prayer  of  Joseph.  ties. 

Eldad  and  Modad.  Epistle  of  Barnabas. 

Testament  of  Moses.  Acts  of  Paul. 


THE   APOCRYPHA    OF   BOTH   TESTAMENTS  609 

Assumption  of  Moses.  Apocalypse  of  Paul. 

Psalms  of  Solomon.  Doctrine  of  Clement. 

Apocalypse  of  Elias.  Doctrine  of  Ignatius. 

Vision  of  Elias.  Doctrine  of  Poly  carp. 

Vision  of  Isaias.  Gospel  of  Barnabas. 

Apocalypse  of  Sophonias.  Gospel  of  Matthew. 
Apocalypse  of  Zachary. 

(Pitra  Jur.  Eccles.  Graec.  Hist.) 

It  is  not  within  the  scope  of  our  work  to  give  an  extended 
notice  of  all  these  apocryphal  books.  We  shall  only  speak 
of  those  of  greater  importance  in  their  bearing  upon  the 
Holy  Scriptures,  We  shall  first  speak  of  those  which  the 
Church  permitted  to  be  printed  outside  the  Canon  in  the 
Vulgate. 

Outside  the  Canonical  books  in  the  edition,  of  the  Vul- 
gate, are  found  the  third  and  fourth  Books  of  Ezra,  and  the 
Prayer  of  Manasses. 

The  Third  Book  of  Ezra,  sometimes  called  ''Ezra  Grse- 
cus,"  is  largely  made  up  of  passages  taken  literally  from  the 
canonical  I.  Ezra  and  II.  Chronicles.  It  has  only  the  third, 
fourth,  and  six  first  verses  of  the  fifth  chapter  original.  In 
many  codices  of  the  Greek  text,  it  precedes  the  canonical 
books  of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah,  which  are  comprised  in  one 
volume.  It  also  occupies  the  same  place  in  the  old  versions 
derived  from  the  Septuagint. 

Clement  of  Alexandria,  Origen,  Eusebius,  Athanasius, 
Basil,  Chrysostom,  Cyprian,  Ambrose,  Augustine,  and  Pros- 
per have  quoted  the  third  and  fourth  chapters,  but  the  quo- 
tations are  scattering,  and  feeble  in  mode  of  enunciation. 
It  gradually  lost  credit,  till  after  the  fifth  century  it  disap- 
pears in  the  recorded  use  of  Scripture  in  the  Church. 

The  book  was  not  absolutely  rejected  by  the  Church  in 
the  Council  of  Trent,  and  she  permits  its  reading.  There 
would  be  no  difficulty  in  approving  its  portions  wherein  it 
accords  with  the  aforesaid  canonical  books,  but  there  are 
internal  defects  in  its  original  chapters  in  point  of  doctrine, 
which  will  probably  forever  prevent  it  from  entering  upon 
the  estate  of  canonical  books. 

Though  less  entitled  to  credit  than  the  former,  the 
Fourth  Book  of  Ezra  had  more  influence  on  early  tradi- 

39  (H.S.) 


610        THE  APOCRYPHA  OF  BOTH  TESTAMENTS 

tions.     It  was  upon  the  data  of  this  book  that  the  role  of 
Ezra  as  promulgator  of  the  Canon  was  founded. 

Up  to  the  eighteenth  century,  the  Greek  text  of  the  book 
was  not  known,  and  the  Latin  text  alone  was  in  the  posses- 
sion of  the  world. 

Since  then  Whiston  published  a  translation  of  the  Arabic 
text  (Primitive  Christianity  Revived,  London,  1711) ;  Ewald, 
in  1863,  published  the  Arabic  text;  Lawrence,  in  1820,  pub- 
lished the  Ethiopian  text;  Ceriani  published,  in  i860,  a 
Latin  translation  of  the  Syriac  text;  and  the  Armenian 
Bibles  of  Venice,  1805,  contain  the  Armenian  translation. 

These  show  that  the  Latin  work  has  suffered  mutilations 
and  interpolations.  The  aforesaid  versions  do  not  contain 
the  two  first  and  two  last  chapters  of  the  text  as  found  in  the 
Latin,  and  they  insert  a  long  passage  between  the  thirty- 
fifth  and  thirty-sixth  verses  of  the  seventh  chapter.  It  is 
evident  from  the  context,  and  the  references  of  the  Fathers, 
that  these  versions  are  more  in  accord  with  the  original. 

The  original  book  consisted  of  seven  visions,  in  which  the 
c  last  judgment  is  said  to  impend,  and  men  are  exhorted  to 
prepare  for  it.  The  original  work  seems  to  have  been  the 
work  of  a  Jew,  writing  soon  after  the  fall  of  Jerusalem.  The 
first  two  chapters  and  also  the  last  two  are,  doubtless,  the 
interpolations  of  a  Christian. 

Aside  from  the  influence  that  the  book  had  on  the  tradi- 
tional role  of  Ezra,  the  only  certain  evidence  that  the  book 
was  known  to  the  Greek  Fathers,  is  in  Strom.  III.  16,  of 
Clement  of  Alexandria : 

IV.  Ezra.  V.  35.  Clem.  Strom.  III.  16. 

"And  I  said:  'Why,  O  Lord?  "  'Why  was  not  the  womb 

For  what  was  I  bom?  or  why  of  my  mother  my  tomb,  that  I 
did  not  the  womb  of  my  mother  might  not  see  the  affliction  of 
become  my  tomb,  that  I  might  Jacob,  and  the  tribulation  of 
not  see  the  affliction  of  Jacob  Israel  ? '  saith  Ezra,  the  Proph- 
and  the  travail  of  my  people,  et. ' ' 
Israel?'  " 

Among  the  Latin  Fathers,  Ambrose  often  quotes  it  as 
Scripture. 


THE  APOCRYPHA  OF  BOTH  TESTAMENTS        611 

The  Latin  Church  also  has  incorporated  certain  passages 
from  it  into  its  Liturgy. 

Introit   of    Feria    IIL    after 

IV.  Ezra  IL  37.  Pentecost. 

"  Commen datum  donum  ac-  "Accipite  jucunditatem  glo- 

cipite  et  jucundamini,  gratias     riae    vestrae,    alleluja;    gratias 

agentes  ei,  qui  vos  ad  coelestia      agentes  Deo,  alleluja;  qui  vos 

regna  vocavit. ' '  ad  coelestia  regna  vocavit. ' ' 

In  the  Sixth  Responsorium  in  the  Office  of  the  Apostles, 
we  find  the  following: 

IV.  Ezra  II.  45. 

"  Hi  sunt  qui  mortalem  tuni-  "Isti  sunt  triumphatores  et 

cam  deposuerunt,  et  immorta-  amici  Dei,  qui  contemnentes, 
lem  sumpserunt,  et  confessi  jussa  principum  meruerunt 
sunt  nomen  Dei;  Modo  coron-  praemia  aetema:  modo,  coron- 
antur,   et   accipiunt  palmas. ' '      antur  et  accipiunt  palmam. ' ' 

Responsorium    IV.    of    Pas- 

IV.  Ezra  II.  35.  chal  Office  of  Martyrs. 

"Parati    estote    ad    praemia  "Lux  perpetua  lucebit  sanc- 

regni   quia  lux  perpetua  luce-  tis  tuis,  Domine,  et  aetemitas 

bit  vobis  per  aetemitatem  tern-  temporum. ' ' 
poris. ' ' 

These  extrinsic  data  for  the  approbation  of  the  book,  in 
nowise,  effect  an  argument  in  its  favor.  It  never  entered 
into  the  sacred  literature  of  the  Church.  I  found  only  this 
one  reference  in  Clement's  works,  and  it  is  not  strange  that 
he  should  have  given  some  notice  to  the  book ;  for  he  browsed 
on  every  pasture  whfere  he  could  feed  his  hunger  for  knowl- 
edge. Ambrose  is  more  pious  than  critical,  and  the  visions 
of  the  pseudo  Ezra  pleased  him. 

The  reception  of  a  passage  into  Missal  or  Breviary  adds 
but  little  to  its  historical  claim  to  authenticity.  Both  Missal 
and  Breviary  could  very  profitably  be  revised  again.  More- 
over, the  passages  quoted  are  in  themselves  true,  and  well 
expressed,  and  appropriate  to  the  theme  for  which  used. 

Although  the  book  is  not  absolutely  condemned  by  the 
Church,  it  is  certainly  not  of  divine  origin.  In  fact  it  is  not 
free  from  doctrinal  errors  regarding  the  state  of  the  souls  af- 
ter death,  and  contains  many  Rabbinic  fables. 


612        THE  APOCRYPHA  OF  BOTH  TESTAMENTS 

We  know  upon  the  authority  of  II.  Chronicles  XXXIII. 
12,  1 8,  that  Manasseh,  son  of  Hezekiah,  when  a  captive  in 
Babylon  in  punishment  for  his  sins,  was  moved  to  penance, 
and  prayed  to  God.  But  we  have  no  means  of  knowing 
whether  the  prayer  of  Manasseh  of  the  Latin  Vulgate  be  that 
authentic  prayer.  There  is  very  little  in  its  favor ;  the  work 
is  unimportant,  and  it  probably  will  always  remain  one  of  the 
unsettled  points  of  history. 

In  editions  of  the  Greek  text  of  the  Old  Testament,  we 
find  the  CLI.  Psalm  atttributed  to  David.  St.  Athanasius 
(Epist.  ad  Marcell.  15)  and  Euthemius  (In  Ps.  Proem.) 
regarded  it  as  authentic.  The  import  of  the  Psalm  is  to 
celebrate  David's  victory  over  Goliath.  It  was  never 
received  in  the  Latin  version,  but  it  has  place  in  the  Ethio- 
pian, Armenian,  Syriac,  and  Arabic.  It  is  not  lacking  in 
grace  of  thought  and  diction,  but  no  good  authority  warrants 
its  inspiration. 

In  some  good  codices  of  the  Septuagint,  Eighteen  Psalms 
are  found  entitled  "^aXfjiol  koX  whal  ^d\o^io)VTo<;.  They  were 
unknown  in  the  West,  till  de  la  Cerda  in  1626,  published 
them  from  a  Codex  of  Constantinople,  which  had  been 
brought  into  Germany.  The  burden  of  the  Psalms  is  the 
fallen  estate  of  Israel,  and  the  cry  for  the  Messiah.  It  is 
evident  that  the  original  was  Hebrew  or  Aramaic.  As  it  is 
natural  for  parents  to  love  their  children,  de  la  Cerda  stoutly 
advocated  the  cause  of  his  work,  claiming  that  these  Psalms 
were  either  of  Solomon  or  some  one  who,  with  pious  intent, 
wrote  in  Solomon's  name.  But  the  very  nature  of  the  ar- 
gument precludes  the  authorship  of  Solomon.  Under  him 
Israel  reached  the  zenith  of  her  glory.  They  were  probably 
written  by  some  Jew,  after  Israel  had  begun  to  suffer  the 
subjugation  of  foreign  foes. 

In  the  Alexandrian,  Sinaitic,  and  other  good  codices,  there 
is  found  a  work  which  is  known  as  the  Third  Book  of  Macca- 
bees. It  narrates  a  persecution  of  the  Alexandrine  Jews  by 
Ptolemy  IV.,  Philopator.  Other  history  is  silent  concerning 
this  persecution.  The  book  is  in  no  way  connected  with  the 
Maccabees  or  their  history,  and  seems  to  have  acquired  its 
name  from  its  position  immediately  after  the  books  of  Mac- 


THE   APOCRYPHA    OF    BOTH    TESTAMENTS  613 

cabees.  The  Eighty-fifth  Canon  of  the  Apostles  enumer- 
ates it  among  the  canonical  books,  and  it  finds  an  occasional 
mention  from  some  anonymous  or  obscure  Greek  writer,  but 
it  is  but  little  known  in  the  West,  and  never  found  its  way 
into  a  Latin  codex.  Its  apocryphal  character  is  an  assured 
fact. 

The  Fourth  Book  of  Maccabees  is  a  sort  of  essay  to  prove 
that  reason  should  rule  the  movements  of  the  soul.  It 
appeals  to  the  history  of  Eleazar,  and  the  seven  martyr  sons 
of  the  woman  mentioned  in  II.  Maccabees.  It  is  evident 
from  a  marked  similarity  that  the  author  used  the  Second 
Book  of  Maccabees  in  the  construction  of  his  work.  Euse- 
bius,  Jerome,  and  Philostorgius  attribute  the  work  to  Flav- 
ius  Josephus.  The  book  obtained  some  slight  recognition 
from  Gregory  Nanz.  and  Ambrose.  There  is  nothing  either 
extrinsic  or  intrinsic  to  prove  its  divinity.  In  fact,  it  seems 
to  favor  the  errors  of  the  Stoics  and  other  errors,  and  is 
placed  as  apocryphal  by  all. 

We  mention  now  in  the  second  class,  the  apocryphal 
books  to  which  allusions  are  said  by  some  to  be  found  in  the 
New  Testament.  The  most  notable  of  these  is  the  Book  of 
Henoch. 

In  Gen.  V.  24,  it  is  said  of  Henoch  that  he  walked  with 
God.  This  expression  was  interpreted  to  mean  not  only 
that  he  led  a  godly  life,  but  also  that  he  had  been  vouchsafed 
the  privilege  of  divine  intercourse,  and  of  receiving  divine 
revelations.  Jewish  antiquity  regarded  him  therefore  as  a 
prophet,  equally  familiar  with  heavenly  things  and  the  future 
fortunes  of  the  human  race.  These  views  of  his  character 
gave  occasion  for  attributing  to  Henoch  the  apocryphal 
writing  which  constitutes  one  of  the  principal  monuments  of 
the  apocalyptic  literature  of  later  Judaism. 

The  Book  of  Henoch  acquired  much  of  its  fame  from  a 
supposed  reference  made  to  it  by  Jude  in  his  Epistle,  V.  14: 
"Prophetavit  autem  et  de  his  septimus  ab  Adam  Henoch 
dicens:  *Ecce  venit  Dominus  in  Sanctis  millibus  suis.'  " 
The  words  of  the  Book  of  Henoch  are:  "Et  ecce  venit  cum 
decern  millibus  sanctorum,  ut  judicium  exerceat  de  iis  et 
disjiciat  improbos,"  etc. 


614      THE  CANON  OF  N.  T.  AND  THE  APOCRYPHA 

Moved  especially  by  this  passage  of  Jude,  Tertullian  was 
much  inclined  to  receive  the  book.  His  words,  however, 
show  that  he  was  conscious  that  tradition  was  not  with  him. 
The  joint  basis  of  Catholic  faith  in  tradition  does  not  con- 
sist of  the  stray  voices  of  men,  who,  through  the  frailty  of 
human  reason,  at  times  lapsed  into  unsupported  vagaries. 
No  man  representing  the  Christian  thought  of  the  time  ever 
said  that  the  Book  of  Henoch  was  divine.  ^Augustine  and 
Jerome  forcibly  repudiate  it. 

It  was  conceded  by  those  two  Fathers  and  by  many 
others  that  the  Apostle  Jude  quoted  this  book  in  his  Epistle. 
The  Fathers  argue  that  such  use  of  the  book  did  not  neces- 
sarily canonize  the  book.  Provided  the  apocryphal  book 
did,  in  the  referred  passage,  contain  a  real  statement  by 
Henoch,  I  am  not  disposed  to  either  afhrm  or  deny  this  posi- 
tion. But  there  is  no  sufficient  evidence  for  the  applica- 
tion of  such  theory  to  the  matter  in  question.  It  is  far  more 
probable  that  both  the  reference  of  Jude  and  the  apocryphal 
book  are  based  upon  some  common  traditional  or  docu- 
mentary data,  available  in  that  early  age,  or  perhaps  the 
apocryphal  book  took  its  passage  from  the  Epistle  of  Jude, 
since  much  moves  us  to  ascribe  to  the  book  a  later  origin 
than  the  date  of  the  Epistle.  In  fact  the  passage  in  the 
Ethiopian  exemplar  seems  like  an  interpolation,  being  not  in 
harmony  with  the  context. 

All  things  considered,  we  must  conclude  that  the  book  is 
evidently  a  spurious  product  of  unknown  causes. 

The  Assumption  of  Moses  according  to  Origen,  Didy- 
mus,  and  Oecumenius  is  cited  by  St.  Jude,  I.  9.  (Orig.  De 
Prin.  III.  2;  Didym.  et  Oecum.  in  Epist.  Jud.)  It  is  men- 
tioned by  Clement  of  Alexandria  and  others.  The  original, 
which  seems  to  have  been  Aramaic  Hebrew,  is  lost,  as  also 
the  Greek  translation.  All  that  is  preserved  to  us  is  a  frag- 
ment of  the  Latin  translation,  found  by  Ceriani  in  a  palimp- 
sest of  the  Ambrosian  Library,  and  published  by  him  in  his 
Monumenta  Sacra  in  186 1. 

There  is  no  foundation  for  the  opinion  that  Jude  cited 
this  book.     Certain   data  respecting  the   death   of  Moses 


THE  CANON  OF  N.  T.  AND  THE  APOCRYPHA      615 

existed  with  the  Jews,  and  these  formed  the  common  source 
from  which  both  authors  drew. 

The  Apocalypse  of  Moses  is  a  small  book  first  pub- 
lished by  Tischendorf,  in  Greek,  in  1866.  The  work  is  a 
Jewish  romance  of  the  fifth  century.  It  is  unimportant,  and 
almost  unknown  to  the  older  writers.  Certain  later  Greek 
writers  have  tried  to  find  in  it  one  of  the  sources  of  Paul's 
Epistle  to  the  Galatians  (Gal.  V.  6 ;  VI.  1 5) .  If  there  be  any 
resemblance  between  the  two  documents,  it  must  have 
resulted  from  the  use  which  the  author  of  the  spurious  docu- 
ment made  of  Paul's  Epistle. 

In  1 81 9  LawTcnce  published  the  Ethiopian  text  of  the 
Ascension  of  Isaiah.  In  1828  Card.  Mai  discovered  and 
published  two  fragments  of  an  ancient  Latin  version  of  the 
same  work.  A  third  Latin  fragment  was  brought  out  in 
i878byGebhardt. 

vSt.  Jerome  narrates  (in  Is.  64,  4)  that  some  derived  what 
Paul  writes,  I.  Cor.  II.  9,  from  this  apocryphal  book,  while 
others  derive  them  from  the  Apocalypse  of  Eli  ah.  Origen 
conjectured  that  Math.  XXVII.  9,  was  derived  from  an 
apocryphal  book  of  Jeremiah.  Both  these  works  and  these 
opinions  are  unimportant,  and  have  no  influence  on  Chris- 
tian thought,  and  w^e  turn  to  more  important  things. 

Chief  among  the  apocryphal  books  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment are  the  Letter  of  Abgar,  King  of  Oshroene,  to  Jesus 
Christ,  and  Jesus'  response.  The  two  documents,  as  pre- 
served for  us  by  Eusebius,  are  as  follows : 

"Copy  of  the  Letter  Written  by  King  Abgarus  to 
Jesus,  and  Sent  to  Him,  at  Jerusalem, 
BY  Ananias,  the  Courier. 

"Abgarus,  prince  of  Edessa,  sends  greeting  to  Jesus,  the 
excellent  Saviour,  who  has  appeared  in  the  borders  of  Jeru- 
salem. I  have  heard  the  reports  respecting  thee  and  thy 
cures,  as  performed  by  thee  without  medicines  and  without 
the  use  of  herbs.  For  as  it  is  said,  thou  causest  the  blind  to 
see  again,  the  lame  to  walk,  and  thou  cleansest  the  lepers, 
and  thou  cast  est  out  impure  spirits  and  demons,  and  thou 


616      THE  CANON  OF  N.  T.  AND  THE  APOCRYPHA 

healest  those  that  are  tormented  by  long  disease,  and  thou 
raisest  the  dead.  And  hearing  all  these  things  of  thee,  I 
concluded  in  my  mind  one  of  two  things :  either  that  thou  art 
God,  and  having  descended  from  heaven,  doest  these  things, 
or  else  doing  them,  thou  are  the  Son  of  God.  Therefore,  now 
I  have  written  and  besought  thee  to  visit  me,  and  to  heal  the 
disease  with  which  I  am  afflicted.  I  have,  also,  heard  that 
the  Jews  murmur  against  thee,  and  are  plotting  to  injure 
thee ;  I  have,  however,  a  very  small  but  noble  state,  which  is 
sufficient  for  us  both." 

The  Answer  of  Jesus  to  King  Abgarus,  by  the 
Courier,  Ananias. 

'Blessed  art  thou,  O  Abgarus,  who,  without  seeing,  hast 
believed  in  me.  For  it  is  written  concerning  me,  that  they 
who  have  seen  me  will  not  believe,  that  they  who  have  not 
seen,  may  believe  and  live.  But  in  regard  to  what  thou  hast 
written,  that  I  should  come  to  thee,  it  is  necessary  that  I 
should  fulfill  all  things  here,  for  which  I  have  been  sent. 
And  after  this  fulfilment,  thus  to  be  received  again  by  Him 
that  sent  me.  And  after  I  have  been  received  up,  I  will  send 
to  thee  a  certain  one  of  my  disciples,  that  he  may  heal  thy 
affliction,  and  give  life  to  thee  and  to  those  who  are  with 
thee.'  " 

The  continuation  of  the  account  in  Eusebius  narrates 
that  after  the  resurrection  of  Jesus,  Thaddeus  the  Apostle, 
went  to  the  king,  healed  him  of  his  infirmity  and  converted 
his  people.  The  celebrated  historian  of  Armenia,  Moses  of 
Khorene,  testifies  to  the  substantial  facts  of  Eusebius' 
account. 

Several  other  accounts  of  the  legend  are  in  existence, 
some  of  them  containing  additional  data.  According  to 
Moses  of  Khorene,  the  ambassador  sent  to  Jesus  by  Abgar 
brought  back  a  portrait  of  the  Lord  which  was  venerated  at 
Edessa  up  to  the  fifth  century.  The  Syriac  account  of  the 
correspondence  affirms  that  the  answer  of  Jesus  was  not  by 
writing,  but  by  oral  declaration  delivered  to  the  ambassador 
of  the  king.  The  whole  legend  appears  in  the  celebrated 
Doctrine  of  Addai.     It  is,  of  course,  legendary;  a  curious 


THE  CANON  OF  N.  T.  AND  THE  APOCRYPHA      617 

monument  of  Oriental  literature.  It  is,  as  we  have  seen, 
declared  apocryphal  in  the  decree  of  Gelasius,  De  Recip- 
iendis  Lihris  (Migne,  Patrol.  Lat.  59,  164). 

St.  Ephrem  fully  believed  in  the  authenticity  of  the 
recital,  and  Baronius  declared  that  the  recital  was  worthy 
of  a  certain  veneration,  but  a  critical  examination  of  the 
history  reveals  a  certain  element  of  the  impossible  and  the 
incredible,  which  plainly  stamps  it  as  fiction. 

Fabricus,  in  his  Codex  Apocryphus  Novi  Testamenti, 
Tom.  I.  p.  843  et.  seqq.,  exhibits  three  letters  of  the  Blessed 
Virgin  Mary.  The  first  is  addressed  to  St.  Ignatius  of  Anti- 
och,  and  is  as  follows : 

"The  letter  of  the  Blessed  Virgin  Mary  to  St.  Ignatius  of 
Antioch. 

'The  himible  handmaid  of  Jesus  Christ  salutes  Ignatius, 
the  beloved  disciple.  What  things  you  have  heard  of  John 
concerning  Jesus,  and  believed,  are  true.  Believe  them; 
cleave  to  them,  and  firmly  cling  to  the  doctrine  of  Christian- 
ity, which  thou  hast  received,  and  conform  thy  acts  and 
thy  life  thereto.  I  shall  come  with  John  to  visit  thee  and 
those  that  are  with  thee.  Stand  fast  in  faith,  and  work 
manfully.  Let  not  the  acerbity  of  persecution  move  thee, 
but  let  thy  spirit  wax  strong,  and  exult  in  God,  thy  Saviour. 
Amen." 

The  second  is  to  the  people  of  Messina,  the  text  of  which 
is  as  follows : 

"The  Virgin  Mary,  daughter  of  Joachim,  the  most  humble 
handmaid  of  God,  the  mother  of  the  crucified  Jesus,  of  the 
tribe  of  Juda,  of  the  line  of  David,  sends  greeting  and  the 
blessing  of  the  Almighty  God  to  all  of  Messina. 

"It  is  attested  by  public  document  that  ye  in  great  faith 
sent  to  us  messengers  and  legates,  (vos  omnes  fide  magna 
legatos  et  nuncios  per  publicum  documentum  ad  nos  misisse 
constat) .  Being  taught  the  way  of  truth  through  the  preach- 
ing of  Paul,  ye  confess  that  our  Son  is  the  begotten  of  God, 
God  and  man,  and  that  after  his  resurrection,  he  ascended 
into  Heaven.  Wherefore,  we  bless  you  and  your  city,  and 
profess  ourselves  its  perpetual  protector. 


618      THE  CANON  OF  N.  T.  AND  THE  APOCRYPHA 

"In  the  year  of  our  Son  forty-two,  the  Nones  of  July,  the 
vSeventeenth  moon,  the  fifth  day  of  the  week,  at  Jerusalem, 

The  Virgin  Mary." 

Any  one  that  has  ever  read  the  Magnificat,  or  Mary's 
history  in  the  Gospel,  has  no  need  of  other  proof  than  the 
mere  reading  to  pronounce  this  a  forgery.  Critics  wisely 
concur  in  placing  these  letters  as  supposititious,  and  assign 
to  them  a  quite  recent  date. 

In  the  Cathedral  Church  in  Messina,  there  exists  an 
exemplar  of  this  letter,  and  on  the  fifth  of  June,  the  yearly 
commemoration  of  it  is  celebrated,  called  by  the  people 
"  Fest  a  della  Sacra  Lett  era."  Rev.  Father  Inchofer  pub- 
lished in  163 1  an  erudite  defense  of  the  authenticity  of  the 
letter.  It  is  an  evidence  of  the  strange  uses  to  which  a 
man  may  devote  talents  of  a  high  order. 

A  third  letter  of  the  Blessed  Virgin  is  directed  to  the 
Florentines:  "Florence,  dear  to  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  my 
Son,  and  to  me.  Hold  to  the  faith,  be  instant  in  prayer,  be 
strong  in  patience,  for  by  these  will  you  obtain  eternal  sal- 
vation with  God."  In  some  texts  there  is  added:  "and 
glory  with  men." 

This  letter  is  of  the  same  character  as  the  former,  and  its 
origin  is  similar. 

The  same  Fabricus  and  Sixtus  of  Sienna,  have  preserved 
for  us  six  letters  of  the  Apostle  Paul  to  Seneca,  and  eight 
letters  of  Seneca  to  Paul.  They  at  least  have  the  credit  of 
antiquity,  since  Jerome  (De  Vir.  111.)  and  Augustine  (Epist. 
54  ad  Maced.)  praise  them.  The  drift  of  the  letters  is  moral, 
and  they  contain  nothing  contrary  to  doctrine,  but,  from 
internal  evidence  critics  agree  that  they  are  supposititious. 
They  contain  nothing  of  Paul's  vigor  of  thought.  The 
opinion  is  well  founded,  however,  that  relations  of  esteem 
existed  between  Seneca  and  Paul,  and  some  have  held  that 
there  did  exist  some  letters  of  their  correspondence,  of  which 
these  are  forged  imitations. 

Liturgies  exist  of  St.  Peter,  St.  James,  St.    Matthew    and 
St.  Mark.     That  they  are  not  of  the  authorship  of  these  is 


THE  CANON  OF  N.  T.  AND  THE  APOCRYPHA      619 

plain.  It  is  probable,  however,  that  they  were  written  dur- 
ing the  Apostolic  epoch  or  soon  after,  but  have  suffered 
later  interpolations  and  additions. 

In  the  founts  of  tradition  we  find  mention  of  the  ''Doc- 
trine of  the  Apostles,"  'The  Constitutions  of  the  Apostles," 
"The  Canons  of  the  Apostles,"  and  "The  Two  Ways  or  Judg- 
ment of  Peter."  These  seem  to  be  different  forms  of  one 
composite  work,  composed  of  the  Constitutions  and  Canons 
of  the  Apostles.  Concerning  these,  we  find  the  following 
facts. 

About  500  A.  D.,  Dionysius  Exiguus,  a  Roman  monk 
of  great  learning,  at  the  request  of  Stephen,  Bishop  of 
Salona,  made  a  collection  of  Greek  Canons,  translating  them 
into  Latin.  At  the  head  of  this  collection  he  placed  fifty 
canons,  with  this  title,  'Tncipiunt  Regulse  Ecclesiasticse 
sanctorum  Apostolorum,  prolatae  per  Clementem  Ecclesise 
Romanse  Pontificem."  At  the  same  time,  however,  Dion- 
ysius says  in  the  preface  to  his  work,  "  In  principio  itaque 
canones,  qui  dicuntur  Apostolorum,  de  Grseco  transtulimus 
quibus  quia  plurimi  consensum  non  prcebuere  facilem,  hoc 
ipsum  vestram  noluimus  ignorare  sanctitatem,  quamvis 
postea  qusedam  constituta  pontificum  ex  ipsis  canonibus 
assumpta  esse  videantur. " 

These  words  obviously  point  to  a  difference  of  opinion 
prevailing  in  the  Church,  though  it  has  been  doubted  by 
some  whether  the  dissentients  spoken  of  rejected  the  Canons 
altogether,  or  merely  denied  that  they  were  the  work  of 
the  Apostles.  And  with  regard  to  the  last  clause,  it  is 
much  disputed  whether  previous  popes  can  be  shown  to 
have  known  and  cited  these  Canons.  Hefele  denies  that 
"Pontifices"  means  popes,  and  would  understand  it  of 
bishops  in  their  synodical  constitutions. 

About  fifty  years  after  the  work  of  Dionysius,  John  of 
Antioch,  otherwise  called  Johannes  Scholasticus,  patriarch 
of  Constantinople,  set  forth  a  a-vpTayina  Kavovwv,  which 
contained  not  fifty  but  eighty-five  Canons  of  the  Apostles. 
And  in  the  year  692  these  were  expressly  recognized  in  the 
decrees  of   the   Quinisextine  Council,  not  only  as  binding 


620      THE  CANON  OF  N.  T.  AND  THE  APOCRYPHA 

Canons,  but  (it  would  seem)  as  of  Apostolic  origin.     They 
are  therefore  in  force  in  the  Greek  Church. 

How  it  came  to  pass  that  Dionysius  translated  only  fifty 
does  not  appear.  Some  writers  have  supposed  that  he 
rejected  what  was  not  to  be  reconciled  with  the  Roman 
practice.  But,  as  Hefele  observes,  this  could  hardly  be 
his  motive,  inasmuch  as  he  retains  a  canon  as  to  the  nullity 
of  heretical  baptism,  which  is  at  variance  with  the  view 
of  the  Western  Church.  Hence  it  has  been  suggested  that 
the  MS.  used  by  Dionysius  was  of  a  different  class  from 
that  of  John  of  Antioch  (for  they  vary  in  some  expressions, 
and  have  also  a  difference  in  the  numbering  of  the  Canons) , 
and  that  it  may  have  had  only  the  fifty  translated  by  the 
former.  And  an  inference  has  also  been  drawn  that  the 
thirty -five  later  Canons  are  of  a  later  date.  Indeed,  accord- 
ing to  some,  they  are  obviously  of  a  different  type,  and 
were  possibly  added  to  the  collection  at  the  same  time  that 
the  Canons  were  appended  to  the  Constitution. 

Both  in  the  collection  of  John  of  Antioch,  and  in  that 
of  Dionysius  they  are  alleged  to  have  been  drawn  up  by 
Clement  from  the  directions  of  the  Apostles.  In  several 
places  the  Apostles  speak  in  the  first  person,  and  in  the 
eighty-fifth  canon  Clement  uses  the  first  person  singular  of 
himself : 

'*  For  you,  both  clergy  and  laity,  let  these  be,  as  books 
to  be  reverenced  and  held  holy,  in  the  Old  Testament — 
five  of  Moses,  Genesis,  Exodus,  Leviticus,  Numbers,  Deuter- 
onomy— of  Jesus  the  son  of  Nun,  one;  of  Judges,  one; 
Ruth,  one;  of  Kings,  four;  of  Paralipomena  the  book  of 
days,  two;  of  Esdras,  two;  of  Esther,  one;  of  Maccabees, 
three;  of  Job,  one;  of  the  Psalter,  one;  of  Solomon,  three — 
Proverbs,  Ecclesiastes,  Song  of  Songs;  of  the  Prophets 
thirteen;  of  Isaiah,  one;  of  Jeremiah,  one;  of  Ezekiel,  one: 
of  Daniel,  one.  Over  and  above  is  to  be  mentioned  to  you 
that  your  young  men  study  the  Wisdom  of  the  Learned 
Sirach.  But  of  ours,  that  is  of  the  New  Testament,  let 
there  be  four  gospels,  Matthew's,  Mark's,  Luke's,  John's; 
fourteen  Epistles  of  Paul;  two  Epistles  of  Peter;  three  of 
John ;  one  of  Jude ;  two  Epistles  of  Clement ;  and  the  regu- 


THE  CANON  OF  N.  T.  AND  THE  APOCRYPHA      621 

lations  addressed  to  you  bishops  through  me,  Clement, 
in  eight  books,  which  it  is  not  right  to  pubUsh  before  all, 
on  account  of  the  mysteries  in  them;  and  the  Acts  of  us, 
the  Apostles." 

The  Apocryphal  Gospel  of  the  Hebrews  is  often 
spoken  of  in  early  tradition.  Its  origin  appears  from  the 
following  data.  Out  of  the  Judaizing  tendencies  of  the 
first  century  arose  the  sects  of  the  Nazirites  and  the  Ebion- 
ites.  Both  these  sects  strove  to  bring  the  rites  of  the  Old 
Law  into  the  Christian  dispensation,  and  it  is  quite  certain 
that  the  Ebionites  rejected  the  divinity  of  Jesus  Christ. 
Both  sects  used  a  Gospel  in  Hebrew,  which  each  mutilated 
and  adapted  to  their  theories. 

The  existence  of  this  Gospel  of  the  Hebrews  as  a  distinct 
work,  differing  from  our  canonical  Gospel  of  St.  Matthew, 
is  first  put  on  record  by  Clemens  Alexandrinus  (Strom.  II. 
9  J  P-  453  Potter)  and  by  Origen  who  makes  several  citations 
from  it  (in  Joann.  Tom.  II.  6;  in  Jerem.  XV.  4;  in  Matt. 
Tom.  XV.  14).  Hegesippus  is  also  reported  to  have  bor- 
rowed some  things  from  the  Gospel  of  the  Hebrews  (Euseb. 
H.  E.  IV.  22).  According  to  Origin  {Horn.  I.  in  Luc.)  and 
Jerome  {in  Matth.  prcef;  c.  Pelag.  III.  i.)  it  also  bore 
among  the  Ebionites  the  title  of  Gospel  according  to  the 
Apostles. 

The  Epistle  of  Paul  to  the  Laodiceans  is  mentioned 
in  Muratori's  fragment,  and  by  Jerome  and  Theodoret. 
(Hier.  De  Vir.  111.  V. ;  Theod.  in  Coll.  IV.  16.)  Both  these 
Fathers  repudiate  it.  In  the  Codex  of  Fulda,  the  text  of 
such  a  letter  exists.  From  Colossians,  IV.  16,  it  is  highly 
probable  that  Paul  wrote  to  the  Church  of  Laodicea,  but 
it  is  evident  from  an  inspection  of  the  text  of  Fulda  that 
it  is  supposititious.  The  same  judgment  must  be  passed 
on  the  third  letter  to  the  Corinthians,  which  the  Armenians 
retain  in  their  bibles. 

The  Epistle  of  Barnabus,  before  mentioned,  was  in 
much  favor  in  the  early  Church.  Clement  of  Alexandria 
and  Origen  considered  it  authentic.  Eusebius  (Hist.  Eccles. 
III.  25,)  places  it  among  the  spurious  books.  It  is  found 
in  the  Codex  of  Mt.  Sinai.     Some  of  those  who  have  denied 


622      THE  CANON  OF  N.  T  AND  THE  APOCRYPHA 

the  inspiration  of  the  book  have  maintained  that  it  was 
of  Barnabas'  authorship.  But  the  internal  evidence  dis- 
proves its  divinity  and  its  authorship.  The  matter  is 
trifling  and  excessively  allegorical,  ill  fitting  the  "son  of 
consolation,"  the  co-laborer  of  Paul.  The  writer  reveals 
complete  ignorance  of  the  Jewish  Law  and  rites;  whereas 
Barnabas  was  a  Levite,  who  had  lived  long  in  Jerusalem. 
Moreover,  the  writer  is  opposed  to  the  Jewish  Law,  even 
to  deal  with  it  unjustly.  These  reasons  moved  Hefele  to 
reject  the  authorship  of  the  Epistle,  and  we  believe  them 
conclusive.  As  to  date,  though  we  may  not  be  certain, 
it  is  most  probably  a  product  of  the  first  century. 

In  the  latter  half  of  the  second  century  there  was  in 
circulation  a  book  of  visions  and  allegories,  purporting  to  be 
written  by  one  Hennas,  and  which  was  commonly  known 
as  The  Shepherd.  This  book  was  treated  with  respect 
bordering  on  that  paid  to  the  canonical  Scriptures  of  the 
New  Testament,  and  it  came  into  the  public  reading  of 
different  churches.  A  passage  from  it  is  quoted  by  Irenaeus 
(IV.  20,  p.  253)  with  the  words,  "Well  said  the  Scripture," 
a  fact  taken  notice  of  by  Eusebius  {H.  E.  v.  8).  That 
Irenseus  did  not  place  the  book  on  a  level  with  the  canonical 
Scriptures  may  be  inferred  from  his  having  quoted  it  but 
once,  not  appealing  to  it  in  his  discussion  of  Scripture 
testimonies  in  his  third  book.  The  mutilated  commence- 
ment of  the  Stromateis  of  Clement  of  Alexandria,  opens 
in  the  middle  of  a  quotation  from  The  Shepherd,  and  about 
ten  times  elsewhere  he  cites  the  book,  always  with  a  com- 
plete acceptance  of  the  reality  and  divine  character  of  the 
revelations  made  to  Hermas,  but  without  any  explanation 
of  his  opinion,  who  Hermas  was  or  when  he  lived.  In  the 
next  generation  Origen,  who  frequently  cites  the  book, 
says  {in  Rom.  XVI.  14,  Vol,  IV.  p.  683)  that  it  seems  to 
him  very  useful,  and  he  gives  it  as  his  individual  opinion 
that  it  was  divinely  inspired.  He  further  makes  a  guess, 
which  was  repeated  by  others  after  him,  but  which  appears 
to  rest  on  no  earlier  authority,  that  it  was  written  by  the 
Hermas  mentioned  at  the  end  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans. 
His  other  quotations  show  that  less  favorable  views  of  the 


THE   LOST  BOOKS    OF   BOTH    TESTAMENTS  623 

book  were  current  in  his  time.  His  quotations  from  The 
Shepherd  are  carefully  separated  from  those  from  the  canon- 
ical books ;  he  generally  adds  to  a  quotation  from  The  Shep- 
herd a  saving  clause,  giving  the  reader  permission  to  reject 
it;  he  speaks  of  it  (in  Matt.  XIX.  7,  Vol.  III.  p.  644)  as  a 
writing  current  in  the  Church,  but  not  acknowledged  by  all, 
and  {De  Princ.  IV.  11)  as  a  book  despised  by  some.  Euse- 
bius  (II.  25),  places  the  book  among  the  v66a  with  the  Acts 
of  Paul,  Revelation  of  Peter,  Epistle  of  Barnabas,  etc. 
Elsewhere  (III.  3),  while  he  is  unable  to  place  it  among  the 
avTtXeyofieva  as  being  rejected  by  some,  he  says  that  it 
had  been  publicly  used  in  churches,  that  some  of  the  most 
eminent  writers  had  employed  it,  and  that  it  was  judged 
by  some  most  necessary  for  those  who  have  particular 
need  of  elementary  instruction  in  the  faith.  Athanasius, 
too  (Ep.  Fest.  39,  Vol.  I.  pt.  II.  p.  963),  classes  The  Shepherd 
with  some  of  the  canonical  books  of  the  Old  Testament  and 
with  "the  teaching  of  the  Apostles,"  as  not  canonical,  but 
useful  to  be  employed  in  catechetical  instruction.  The 
Shepherd  is  found  in  the  Sinaitic  MS.  following  the  Epistle 
of  Barnabas,  as  an  appendix  to  the  books  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment. After  the  fourth  century  the  book  rapidly  passed 
out  of  ecclesiastical  use  in  the  East. 

External  evidence  shows  Rome  to  have  been  its  place 
of  composition.  Foremost  comes  the  writer  of  the  Mura- 
TORiAN  Fragment  on  the  Canon,  who  tells  us  that  the  book 
had  been  written  during  the  episcopate  of  Pius,  by  Hermas, 
a  brother  of  that  bishop,  in  a  period  which  the  writer  speaks 
of  as  within  then  living  memory.  He  concludes  that  the 
book  ought  to  be  read,  but  not  to  be  publicly  used  in  the 
Church  among  the  prophetic  writings,  the  number  of  which 
was  complete,  nor  among  the  apostolic. 

Chapter  XV. 
The  Lost  Books  of  Both  Testaments. 

It  is  the  common  opinion  of  theologians  that  an  inspired 
book  may  perish,  and  that  some  de  facto  have  perished. 
As  authorities  for  this  opinion  we  may  cite  Origen,  Chryso- 


624  THE   LOST  BOOKS   OF    BOTH   TESTAMENTS 

stem,  St.  Thomas,  Bellarmine,  Serarius,  Pineda,  Bonfrere, 
and  nearly  all  the  later  theologians.* 

Salmeron  strove  to  set  aside  this  opinion  by  the  following 
arguments:  "The  Providence  of  God,  which  gave  a  book 
to  teach  men,  will  preserve  that  book.  Moreover,  if  the 
Church,  even  in  its  preparatory  state  in  the  Old  Law,  should 
allow  a  book  to  perish,  which  had  been  committed  to  her 
care,  she  would  be  unfaithful  to  her  trust."  In  response 
we  say  first  that  two  questions  are  confused  here.  It  is 
one  thing  that  a  book  divinely  inspired,  not  yet  canonized 
by  the  Church,  should  perish ;  another  that  a  book  delivered 
to  the  Church  by  canonization  should  perish.  This  latter 
fact  has  never  happened.  Franzelin,  in  response  to  Sal- 
meron, argues  that  it  is  possible  that  even  a  canonical  book 
should  perish,  for  the  reason  that  such  book  is  not  the  sole 
or  absolutely  necessary  means  of  teaching  men  the  truth. 
The  Church  is  only  infallible  and  indefectible  in  furnishing 
an  adequate  means  to  impart  truth  to  man,  and  her  teaching 
power  would  not  be  hampered  by  the  loss  of  a  book,  or 
portion  thereof,  of  Holy  Scripture.  The  argument  of 
Salmeron  that  God,  who  gave  the  book,  would  preserve  it 
is  feeble,  for  the  book  may  be  superseded  by  another,  or 
it  may  not  be  necessary  for  succeeding  ages. 

The  common  opinion  is,  therefore,  that  an  inspired 
book  may  perish,  and  that  some  have  perished.  Many 
proverbs  and  canticles  of  Solomon- and  writings  of  prophets, 
spoken  of  in  the  Scriptures,  have  certainly  perished,  and 
some,  at  least,  of  these  were  inspired. 

In  the  Old  Testament  we  find  mention  of  the  following 
works:  The  Book  of  the  Wars  of  the  Lord  (Num.  XXI.  14) ; 
The  Book  of  the  Just  (Jos.  X.  13) ;  The  Book  of  the  Words 
of  the  Days  of  Solomon  (II.  Sam.  XL  41);  The  Book  of 
the  Words  of  the  Days  of  the  Kings  of  Juda  (III.  Kings, 
XIV.  19) ;  The  Book  of  the  Words  of  the  Days  of  the  Kings 
of  Israel  (III.  Kings.  XIV.  20) ;  The  Book  of  Samuel  the 

*Orig.  in  Cant.  Prol.  c.  fin.  (M.  13,  84);  S.  Chrys.  in  i.  Cor.  horn.  7,  3 
(M.  61,  58);  S.  Thorn.  Comm.  in  ep.  S.  Paul,  ad  i  Cor.  5,  4  et  Col.  4,16; 
Bellarm.  de  verbo  Dei  IV.  4;  Serar.  Proleg.  c.  VIII.  qu.  14.  15;  Pineda. 
Salom.  praev.  I.  i;  Bonfrer.  Praeloq.  VI.  2,  etc. 


THE    HEBREW   TEXT  OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT  625 

Prophet  (I.  Chron.  XXIX.  29);  The  Words  of  Nathan, 
the  Prophet  (1.  c.) ;  The  Book  of  Gad,  the  Prophet  (1.  c.) ; 
The  Books  of  Ahiah  (11.  Chron.  IX.  29) ;  The  Vision  of  Addo, 
the  Prophet  (1.  c.) ;  The  Book  of  Semeia,  the  Prophet  (II. 
Chron.  XII.  15);  The  Book  of  Jehu,  the  Son  of  Hanan 
(II.  Chron.  XX.  34) ;  The  Discourse  of  Hosai  (II.  Chron. 
XXXIII.  19);  The  Deeds  of  Oziah  by  Isaiah  (II.  Chron. 
XXVI.  22);  three  thousand  Parables  of  Solomon  (III. 
Kings  IV.  22);  five  thousand  Canticles  of  Solomon  (1.  c.) ; 
the  treatise  of  Solomon  on  Natural  History  (1.  c.) ;  certain 
writings  of  Jeremiah  (II.  Maccab.  II.  i);  The  Book  of  the 
Days  of  John  Hyrcanus  (I.  Maccab.  XVI.  24) ;  The  Book 
of  Jason,  the  Cyrenean  (II.  Maccab.  II.  24). 

We  hold  it  undoubted  that  a  person  inspired,  in  one 
production,  may  write  another  without  such  influence  of 
the  Holy  Spirit.  We  admit  that  some  of  the  mentioned 
works  were  not  inspired;  but  there  are  others  whose  titles 
clearly  prove  that  they  were  inspired  works,  and  we  no 
longer  possess  them. 

Of  the  New  Testament,  nearly  all  admit  that  one  of 
Paul's  Epistles  to  the  Corinthians  (I.  Cor.  V.  9),  and  the 
Epistle  to  the  Church  of  Laodicea  (Coloss.  IV.  16),  have 
perished.  Who  will  deny  that  in  these  Paul  also  was 
inspired  ? 

Wherefore,  we  conclude  that  the  opinion,  which  main- 
tains the  possibility  and  the  actuality  of  the  loss  of  inspired 
writings,   rests  on  convincing  data. 

Chapter   XVI. 
The  Hebrew  Text  of  the  Old  Testament. 

All  the  protocanonical  books  of  the  Old  Testament, 
except  some  Chaldaic  fragments  of  Ezra  and  Daniel,  were 
written  in  Hebrew.* 

Numerous  appellations  have,  at  different  times,  been 
given  to  the  Hebrew  language.     In  the  Scriptures  it  is 

*0f  Daniel,  the  portion  from  the  fourth  verse  of  second  chapter,  to  the 
twenty-eighth  verse  of  seventh  chapter,  was  written  in  Chaldaic.  Of  Ezra 
the  portions  from  I.  Ezra  IV.  8,  to  VI.  18,  and  from  the  twelfth  to  the 
twenty-sixth  verse  of  seventh  chapter  were  written  in  Chaldaic. 


626  THE    HEBREW   TEXT   OF   THE    OLD    TESTAMENT 

nowhere  called  Hebrew.  This  term,  as  it  is  used  in  John 
V.  2,  and  in  several  other  passages  in  the  New  Testament, 
does  not  refer  to  the  Biblical  Hebrew,  but  to  the  Syro- 
Chaldaic  dialect  prevalent  in  Palestine  in  the  time  of  Jesus 
Christ.  In  II.  Kings  XVI 1 1.  26.  it  is  called  the  language 
of  the  Jews.  In  the  Targums  or  Chaldee  Paraphrases  of 
the  Old  Testament,  the  appellation — holy  tongue — is  first 
applied  to  it:  but  the  name,  by  which  it  is  usually  distin- 
guished, is  Hebrew,  as  being  the  language  of  the  Hebrew 
nation. 

The  period  from  the  age  of  Moses  to  that  of  David  has 
been  considered  the  golden  age  of  the  Hebrew  language, 
which  declined  in  purity  from  that  time  to  the  reign  of 
Hezekiah  or  Manasseh,  having  received  several  foreign 
words  from  the  commercial  and  political  intercourse  of 
the  Jews  and  Israelites  with  the  Assyrians  and  Babylonians. 
This  period  has  been  termed  the  silver  age  of  the  Hebrew 
language.  In  the  interval  between  the  reign  of  Hezekiah 
and  the  Babylonian  captivity,  the  purity  of  the  language 
was  neglected,  and  so  many  foreign  words  were  introduced 
into  it,  that  this  period  has,  not  inaptly,  been  designated 
its  iron  age.  During  the  seventy  year's  captivity,  though 
it  does  not  appear  that  the  Hebrews  entirely  lost  their 
native  tongue,  yet  it  underwent  so  considerable  a  change 
from  their  adoption  of  the  vernacular  languages  of  the 
countries  where  they  had  resided,  that  afterwards,  on  their 
return  from  exile,  they  spoke  a  dialect  of  Chaldee  mixed 
with  Hebrew  words.  On  this  account  it  was,  that,  when 
the  Hebrew  Scriptures  were  read,  it  was  found  necessary 
to  interpret  them  to  the  people  in  the  Chaldaean  language. 
When  Ezra,  the  scribe,  brought  the  book  of  the  law  of 
Moses  before  the  congregation,  the  Levites  are  said  to  have 
caused  the  people  to  understand  the  law,  because  they 
read  in  the  hook,  in  the  law  of  God,  distinctly,  and  gave  the 

SENSE,    AND    CAUSED    THEM    TO    UNDERSTAND    THE    READING. 

(Neh.  VIII.  9.)  Some  time  after  the  return  from  the  great 
captivity,  Hebrew  ceased  to  be  spoken  altogether:  though 
it  continued  to  be  cultivated  and  studied,  by  the  priests 
and  Levites,  as  a  learned  language  that  they  might  be 


THE    HEBREW    TEXT   OF    THE    OLD   TESTAMENT  627 

enabled  to  expound  the  law  and  the  prophets  to  the  people, 
who,  it  it  appears  from  the  New  Testament,  were  well  ac- 
quainted with  their  general  contents  and  tenor;  this  last- 
mentioned  period  has  been  called  the  leaden  age  of  the  lan- 
guage.    How  long     the     Hebrew  was   retained,   both   in 
writing  and  conversation;  or  in  writing,  after  it  ceased  to 
be  the  language  of  conversation,  it  is  impossible  to  deter- 
mine.    At  the  time  of  Maccabees,  Hebrew  was  probably- 
understood,  at  least,  as  the  language  of  books:  perhaps, 
in  some  measure,  also,  among  the  better  informed,  as  the 
language  of  conversation.    But  soon  after  this,  the  dominion 
of  the  Seleucidse,   in  Syria,  over  the  Jewish  nation,  unit- 
ing with  the  former  influence  of  the  Babylonian  captivity  in 
promoting  the  Aramaean  dialect,  appears  to  have  destroyed 
the  remains  of  proper  Hebrew,  as  a  living  language,  and  to 
have   universally   substituted,   in  its   stead,   the   Hebraso- 
Aramaean,  as  it  was  spoken,  in  the  time  of  our  Saviour. 
From  the  time  when   Hebrew  ceased  to  be  vernacular, 
down  to  the  present  day,  a  portion  of  this  dialect  has  been 
preserved  in  the  Old  Testament.     It  has  always  been  the 
subject  of  study  among  learned  Jews.     Before  and  at  the 
time  of  Christ,   there  were  flourishing  Jewish  academies 
at  Jerulsaem;  especially  under  Hillel  and  Shammai.     After 
Jerusalem  was  destroyed,  schools  were  set  up  in  various 
places,  but  particularly  they  flourished  at  Tiberias,  until  the 
death  of  R.  Judah,   surnamed  Hakkodesh    or  the  Holy,  the 
author  of  the  Mishna,  about   A.  D.  230.     Some  of  his  pupils 
set  up  other  schools  in  Babylonia,  which  became  the  rivals 
of  these.     The  Babylonian  academies   flourished  until  near 
the  tenth     century      From     the    academies    at    Tiberias 
and  in  Babylonia,  we    have     received  the  Targums,  the 
Talmud,  the  Masora  and  the    written  vowels  and  accents 
of  the  Hebrew  language.     The  Hebrew  of  the  Talmud  and 
of  the  Rabbis  has  a  close    affinity   with  the  later  Hebrew; 
especially  the  first  and  earliest  part  of  it,  the  Mishna. 

Previously  to  the  building  of  Solomon 's  Temple,  the  Pen- 
tateuch was  deposited  by  the  side  of  the  Ark  of  the  Covenant 
(Deut.  XXXI.  24-26.),  to  be  consulted  by  the  Israelites; 
and  after  the  erection  of  that  sacred  edifice,  it  was  deposited 


628  •  THE   HEBREW   TEXT   OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT 

in  the  treasury,  together  with  all  the  succeeding  productions 
of  the  inspired  writers.*  On  the  subsequent  destruction 
of  the  temple  by  Nebuchadnezzar,  the  autographs  of  the 
sacred  books  are  supposed  to  have  perished:  but  some 
learned  men  have  conjectured  that  they  were  preserved, 
because  it  does  not  appear  that  Nebuchadnezzar  evinced 
any  particular  enmity  against  the  Jewish  religion;  and  in 
the  account  of  the  sacred  things  carried  to  Babylon  (11. 
Kings  XXV.,  II.  Chron.  XXXVI.,  Jer.  LII.),  no  mention  is 
made  of  the  sacred  books.  However  this  may  be,  it  is  a 
fact  that  copies  of  these  autographs  were  carried  to  Babylon, 
for  we  find  the  prophet  Daniel  quoting  the  Law,  (Dan.  IX. 
II.  13.)  and  also  expressly  mentioning  the  prophecies  of 
Jeremiah  (IX.  2.),  which  he  could  not  have  done  if  he  had 
never  seen  them.  We  are  further  informed  that,  on  the 
finishing  of  the  temple  in  the  sixth  year  of  Darius,  the  Jew- 
ish worship  was  fully  re-established  according  as  it  is  written 
in  the  hook  of  Moses  (Ezra  VI.  18.) ;  which  would  have  been 
impracticable  if  the  Jews  had  not  had  copies  of  the  Law  then 
among  them.  But  what  still  more  clearly  proves  that  they 
must  have  had  transcripts  of  their  sacred  writings  during, 
as  well  as  subsequent  to,  the  Babylonian  captivity,  is  the 
fact,  that  when  the  people  requested  Ezra  to  produce  the 
law  of  Moses  (Nehem.  VIII.  i.),  they  did  not  entreat  him 
to  get  it  dictated  anew  to  them;  but  that  he  would  bring 
forth  the  hook  of  the  Law  of  Moses,  which  the  Lord  had  com- 
manded to  Israel.  Further,  long  before  the  time  of  Jesus 
Christ,  another  edition  of  the  Pentateuch  was  in  the  hands 
of  the  Samaritans,  which  has  been  preserved  to  our  time ; 
and  though  it  differs  in  some  instances  from  the  text  of  the 
Hebrew  Pentateuch,  yet  upon  the  whole  it  accurately  agrees 
with  the  Jewish  copies.  And  in  the  year  286  or  285  before 
the  Christian  era,  the  Pentateuch  was  translated  into  the 
Greek  language ;  and  this  version,  whatever  errors  may  now 

*That  the  Law  was  placed  by  the  side  of  the^Ark  of  the  Covenant,  and 
not  in  it,  rests  on  clear  evidence.  The  Hebrew  expression  in  Deut.  XXXI. 
26,  is  r\]r\\  nnS  |m  I^P  1n1^  Q??P^  -Ye  shall  place  it 
(the  Law)  by  the  side  of  the  Ark  of  the  Covenant  of  the  Lord."  This 
interpretation  is  supported  by  the  Greek  and  Samaritan  texts. 


THE    HEBREW   TEXT   OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT  629 

be  detected  in  it,  was  so  executed  as  to  show  that  the  text, 
from  which  it  was  made,  agreed  with  the  text  which  we  now 
have. 

As  the  Jews  were  dispersed  through  various  countries, 
to  whose  inhabitants  Greek  was  vernacular,  they  gradually 
acquired  the  knowledge  of  this  language,  and  even  culti- 
vated Greek  literature:  it  cannot  therefore  excite  surprise 
that  the  Septuagint  version  should  be  so  generally  used  as 
to  cause  the  Hebrew  original  to  be  almost  entirely  neglected. 
Hence  the  Septuagint  was  read  in  the  synagogues :  it  appears 
to  have  been  exclusively  followed  by  the  Alexandrian  Jew, 
Philo,  and  it  was  most  frequently,  though  not  solely,  con- 
sulted by  Josephus,  who  was  well  acquainted  with  Hebrew. 

In  the  second  century,  both  Jews  and  Christians  applied 
themselves  sedulously  to  the  study  of  the  Hebrew  Scrip- 
tures. Besides  the  Peshitto  or  Old  Syriac  version  (if  indeed 
this  was  not  executed  at  the  close  of  the  first  century) ,  which 
was  made  from  the  Hebrew  for  the  Syrian  Christians,  three 
Greek  versions  were  undertaken  and  completed ;  one  for  the 
Jews  by  Aquila,  an  apostate  from  Christianity  to  Judaism, 
and  two  by  Theodotion  and  Symmachus.  The  Hebrew  text, 
as  it  existed  in  the  East  from  the  year  200  to  the  end  of  the 
fifth  century,  is  presented  to  us  by  Origen  in  his  Hexapla, 
by  Jonathan  in  his  Targum  or  Paraphrase  on  the  Prophets, 
and  by  the  Rabbis  in  the  Gemaras  or  Commentaries 
on  the  Mishna  or  Traditionary  Expositions  of  the  Hebrew 
Scriptures.  The  variants  are  scarcely  more  numerous  or 
more  important  than  in  the  versions  of  the  second  century. 
But  the  discrepancies,  which  were  observed  in  the  Hebrew 
manuscripts  in  the  second  or  at  least  in  the  third  century, 
excited  the  attention  of  the  Jews,  who  began  to  collate  copies 
and  to  collect  various  readings;  which,  being  distributed 
into  several  classes,  appear  in  the  Jerusalem  Talmud  about 
the  year  280. 

The  state  of  the  Hebrew  text,  in  the  west  of  Europe, 
during  the  fifth  century,  is  exhibited  to  us  in  the  Latin  ver- 
sion made  by  Jerome  from  the  original  Hebrew,  and  in  his 
commentaries  on  the  Scriptures.     From  a  careful  exam  in- 


630  THE   HEBREW   TEXT   OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT 

ation  of  these  two    sources,    several  important  facts  have 
been  collected,  particularly  that 

(i.)  The  Old  Testament  contained  the  same  books 
which  are  at  present  found  in  our  copies. 

(2 .)  The  form  of  the  Hebrew  letters  was  the  same  which 
we  now  have,  as  is  evident  from  Jerome 's  frequently  taking 
notice  of  the  similar  letters,  beth  and  caph,  resh  and  daleth, 
mem  and  samech,  etc. 

(3.)  The  modem  vowel-points,  accents  and  other 
diacritic  signs  were  utterly  unknown  to  Jerome.  Some 
words  were  of  doubtful  meaning  to  him  because  they  were 
destitute  of  vowels. 

(4.)  The  divisions  of  chapters  and  verses  did  not  exist 
in  any  Hebrew  MSS;  but  it  seems  that  both  the  Hebrew 
original  and  the  Septuagint  Greek  version  were  divided  into 
larger  sections,  which  differ  from  those  in  our  copies,  because 
Jerome,  in  his  commentary  on  Amos  VI.  9.,  says  that  what 
is  the  beginning  of  another  chapter  in  the  Hebrew  is  in  the 
Septuagint  the  end  of  the  preceding. 

(5.)  The  Hebrew  MS  used  by  Jerome  for  the  most  part 
agrees  with  the  Masoretic  text,  though  there  are  a  few  un- 
important various  readings. 

After  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  and  the  consequent 
dispersion  of  the  Jews  into  various  countries  of  the  Roman 
empire,  some  of  those  who  were  settled  in  the  East  applied 
themselves  to  the  cultivation  of  literature,  and  opened  var- 
ious schools,  in  which  they  taught  the  Scriptures.  One  of 
the  most  distinguished  of  these  academies  was  that  estab- 
lished at  Tiberias,  in  Palestine,  which  Jerome  mentions  as 
existing  in  the  fifth  century.  The  doctors  of  this  school, 
early  in  the  sixth  century,  agreed  to  revise  the  sacred  text, 
and  issue  an  accurate  edition  of  it ;  for  which  purpose  they 
collected  all  the  scattered  critical  and  grammatical  observa- 
tions they  could  obtain,  which  appeared  likely  to  contribute 
towards  fixing  both  the  reading  and  interpretation  of  Scrip- 
ture, into  one  book,  which  they  called  HIIDD  (MasoRan), 
that  is  tradition,  because  it  consisted  of  remarks  which  they 
had  received  from  others.  Some  rabbinical  authors  pretend 
that,  when  God  gave  the  law  to  Moses  on  Mount  Sinai,  he 


THE   HEBREW   TEXT   OF    THE    OLD   TESTAMENT  631 

taught  him  first  its  true  meaning,  and  secondly  its  true  inter- 
pretation; and  that  both  these  were  handed  down  by  oral 
tradition,  from  generation  to  generation,  until  at  length 
they  were  committed  to  writing.  The  former  of  these,  viz., 
the  true  reading,  is  the  subject  of  the  Masorah ;  the  latter  or 
true  interpretation  is  that  of  the  Mishna  and  Gemara,  of 
which  an  account  is  given  in  a  subsequent  chapter  of  the 
present  volume. 

The  Masoretic  notes  and  criticisms  relate  to  the  books, 
verses,  words,  letters,  vowel  points  and  accents.  The 
Masorites,  or  Masorets,  as  the  inventors  of  this  system  were 
called,  were  the  first  who  distinguished  the  books  and  sec- 
tions of  books  into  verses.  They  marked  the  number  of  all 
the  verses  of  each  book  and  section,  and  placed  the  amount 
at  the  end  of  each  in  numeral  letters,  or  in  some  symbolical 
word  formed  out  of  them ;  and  they  also  marked  the  middle 
verse  of  each  book.  Further,  they  noted  the  verses  where 
something  was  supposed  to  be  forgotten;  the  words  they 
believed  to  be  changed ;  the  letters  which  they  deemed  to  be 
superfluous ;  the  repetitions  of  the  same  verses ;  the  different 
reading  of  the  words  which  are  redundant  or  defective ;  the 
number  of  times  that  the  same  word  is  found  at  the  begin- 
ing,  middle,  or  end  of  a  verse ;  the  different  significations  of 
the  same  word ;  the  agreement  or  conjunction  of  one  word 
with  another;  what  letters  are  pronounced,  and  what  are 
inverted,  together  with  such  as  hang  perpendicular,  and 
they  took  the  number  of  each,  for  the  Jews  cherish  the  sacred 
books  with  such  reverence  that  they  make  a  scruple  of 
changing  the  situation  of  a  letter  which  is  evidently  mis- 
placed; supposing  that  some  mystery  has  occasioned  the 
alteration.  They  have  likewise  reckoned  which  is  the  mid- 
dle of  the  Pentateuch,  which  is  the  middle  clause  of  each 
book,  and  how  many  times  each  letter  of  the  alphabet  occurs 
in  all  the  Hebrew  Scriptures. 

Such  is  the  celebrated  Masorah  of  the  Jews.  At  first,  it 
did  not  accompany  the  text ;  afterwards  the  greatest  part  of 
it  was  written  in  the  margin.  In  order  to  bring  it  within  the 
margin,  it  became  necessary  to  abridge  the  work  itself.  This 
abridgement  was  called  the  little  Masora,  Masora  parva;  but. 


632  THE   HEBREW   TEXT    OF    THE    OLD   TESTAMENT 

being  found  too  short,  a  more  copious  abridgment  was  in- 
serted, which  was  distinguished  by  the  appellation  of  the 
great  Masora,  Masora  magna.  The  omitted  parts  were  added 
at  the  end  of  the  text,  and  called  the  final  Masora,  Masora 
finalis. 

The  age  when  the  Masorites  lived  has  been  much  con- 
troverted. Some  ascribe  the  Masoretic  notes  to  Moses; 
others  attribute  them  to  Ezra,  and  the  members  of  the  great 
synagogue,  and  their  successors  after  the  restoration  of  the 
temple  worship  on  the  death  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes.  Ussh- 
er  places  the  Masorites  before  the  time  of  Jerome;  Cappel,  at 
the  end  of  the  fifth  century ;  Marsh  is  of  opinion  that  they 
cannot  be  dated  higher  than  the  fourth  or  fifth  century; 
Walton,  Basnage,  Jahn,  and  others,  refer  them  to  the  Rabbis 
of  Tiberias  in  the  sixth  century,  and  suppose  that  they  com- 
menced the  Masora,  which  was  augmented  and  continued 
at  different  times,  by  various  authors ;  so  that  it  was  not  the 
work  of  one  man,  or  of  one  age.  In  proof  of  this  opinion, 
which  we  think  the  most  probable,  we  may  remark  that  the 
notes  which  relate  to  the  variations  in  the  pointing  of  partic- 
ular words,  must  have  been  made  after  the  introduction  of 
the  points,  and  consequently  after  the  Talmud ;  other  notes 
must  have  been  made  before  the  Talmud  w^as  finished, 
because  it  is  from  these  notes  that  it  speaks  of  the  points  over 
the  letters,  and  of  the  variations  in  their  size  and  position. 
Hence  it  is  evident,  that  the  whole  was  not  the  work  of  the 
Masorites  of  Tiberias ;  further,  no  good  reason  can  be  assigned 
to  prove  the  Masora  the  work  of  Ezra,  or  his  contemporaries. 
On  the  whole,  then,  it  appears  tha:t  what  is  called  the 
Masora  is  entitled  to  no  greater  reverence  or  attention  than 
may  be  claimed  by  any  other  human  compilation. 

Concerning  the  value  of  the  Masoretic  system  of  nota- 
tion the  learned  are  greatly  divided  in  opinion.  Some  have 
highly  commended  the  undertaking,  and  have  considered 
the  work  of  the  Masorites  as  a  monument  of  stupendous 
labor,  and  unwearied  assiduity,  and  as  an  admirable  inven- 
tion for  delivering  the  sacred  text  from  a  multitude  of 
equivocations  and  perplexities  to  which  it  was  liable,  and 
for  putting  a  stop  to  the  unbounded  licentiousness  and  rash- 


THE    HEBREW    TEXT   OF    THE    OLD   TESTAMENT  633 

ness  of  transcribers  and  critics,  who  often  made  alterations  in 
the  text  on  their  own  private  authority.  Others,  however, 
have  altogether  censured  the  design,  suspecting  that  the 
Masorites  corrupted  the  purity  of  the  text  by  substituting, 
for  the  ancient  and  true  reading  of  their  forefathers,  another 
reading,  more  favorable  to  their  prejudices,  and  more  oppo- 
site to  Christianity,  whose  testimonies  and  proofs  they 
were  desirous  of  weakening  as  much  as  possible. 

Without  adopting  either  of  these  extremes.  Marsh 
observes,  that  "the  text  itself,  as  regulated  by  the  learned 
Jews  of  Tiberias,  was  probably  the  result  of  a  collation  of 
manuscripts.  But  as  those  Hebrew  critics  were  cautious  of 
too  many  corrections  into  the  text,  they  noted  in  the  margins 
of  their  manuscripts,  or  in  their  critical  collections,  such 
various  readings,  derived  from  other  manuscripts,  either  by 
themselves  or  by  their  predecessors,  as  appeared  to  be 
worthy  of  attention.  This  is  the  real  origin  of  those  marginal 
or  Masoretic  readings  which  we  find  in  many  editions  of  the 
Hebrew  Bible.  But  the  propensity  of  the  later  Jews  to  seek 
mystical  meanings  in  the  plainest  facts,  gradually  induced 
the  belief  that  both  textual  and  marginal  readings  proceeded 
from  the  sacred  writers  themselves ;  and  that  the  latter  were 
transmitted  to  posterity  by  oral  tradition,  as  conveying 
some  mysterious  application  of  the  written  words.  They 
were  regarded  therefore  as  materials,  not  of  criticism,  but  of 
interpretation. ' '  The  same  critic  elsewhere  remarks,  that 
notwithstanding  all  the  care  of  the  Masorites  to  preserve 
the  sacred  text  without  variations,  "  if  their  success  has  not 
been  complete,  either  in  establishing  or  preserving  the  Hebrew 
text,  they  have  been  guilty  only  of  the  fault  which  is  com- 
mon to  every  human  effort. ' ' 

In  the  period  between  the  sixth  and  the  tenth  centuries, 
the  Jews  had  two  celebrated  academies,  one  at  Babylon  in 
the  East,  and  another  at  Tiberias  in  the  West,  where  their 
literature  was  cultivated,  and  the  Scriptures  were  very  fre- 
quently transcribed.  Hence  arose  two  recensions  or  editions 
of  the  Hebrew  Scriptures,  which  were  collated  in  the  eight 
or  ninth  century.  The  differences  or  various  readings 
observed  in  them  w^ere  noted,  and  have  been  transmitted  to 


634  THE    HEBREW   TEXT   OF   THE    OLD    TESTAMENT 

our  time  under  the  appellation  of  the  Oriental  and  Occiden- 
tal, or  Eastern  and  Western  readings.  They  are  variously 
computed  at  2  lo,  216  and  220,  and  are  printed  by  Walton  in 
the  Appendix  to  his  splendid  edition  of  the  Polyglot  Bible. 
It  is  worthy  of  remark  that  not  one  of  these  various  read- 
ings is  found  in  the  Septuagint:  they  do  not  relate  to  vowel 
points  or  accents,  nor  do  any  of  them  affect  the  sense.  Our 
printed  editions  vary  from  the  Eastern  readings  in  fifty-five 
places. 

Shortly  after  the  invention  of  the  art  of  printing,  the 
Hebrew  Scriptures  were  committed  to  the  press ;  at  first  in 
detached  portions,  and  afterwards  the  entire  Bible.  The 
principal  editions  are : 

Psalterium  Hebraicum,  cum  commentario  Kimchii. 
Anno  237  (1477).  4to. 

The  first  printed  Hebrew  book.     It  is  of  extreme  rarity. 

Biblia  Hebraica,  cum  punctis.     Soncino,  1488,  folio. 

The  first  edition  of  the  entire  Hebrew  Bible  ever  printed. 
It  is  at  present  of  such  extreme  rarity  that  only  nine  or  ten 
copies  of  it  are  known  to  be  in  existence.  One  of  these  is  in 
the  library  of  Exeter  College,  Oxford. 

Biblia  Hebraica,  8vo.  Brixiae,  1494. 

This  edition  was  conducted  by  Gerson,  the  son  of  Rabbi 
Moses.     It  is  also  of  extreme  rarity. 

Another  primary  edition  is  the  Biblia  Hebraica  Bomberg- 
iana  II.  folio,  Venice,  1525,  1526,  folio. 

This  was  edited  by  Rabbi  Jacob  Ben  Chajim. 

Biblia  Hebraica  cum  utraque  Masora,  Targum,  necnon 
commentariis  Rabbinorum,  studio  et  cum  praefatione  R. 
Jacob  F.  Chajim,  Venetiis,  1 547-1 549,  4  tomes  in  2  vols, 
folio. 

This  is  the  second  of  Rabbi  Jacob  Ben  Chajim 's  editions. 

Biblia  Hebrasa,  cum  utraque  Masora  et  Targum,  item 
cum  commentariis  Rabbinorum,  studio  Johannis  Buxtorfii, 
patris;  adjecta  est  ejusdem  Tiberias,  sive  comrnentarius 
Masoreticus.  Basileae,  1618,  1619,  1620,  4  tomes  in  2  vols, 
folio. 

This  great  work  was  executed  at  the  expense  of  Louis 
Koenig,  an  opulent  bookseller  at  Basle.     On  account  of  the 


THE   HEBREW   TEXT   OF    THE    OLD   TESTAMENT  635 

additional  matter  which  it  contains,  it  is  held  in  great  esteem 
by  Hebrew  scholars,  many  of  whom  prefer  it  to  the  Hebrew 
Bibles  printed  by  Bomberg. 

Biblia  Hebraica  Magna  Rabbinica.  Amstelodami  1724- 
27,  4  vols,  folio. 

This  is  unquestionably  the  most  copious  and  most  valu- 
able of  all  the  Rabbinical  Bibles,  and  was  edited  by  Moses 
Ben  Simeon,  of  Frankfort.  It  is  founded  upon  the  Bomberg 
editions,  and  contains  not  only  their  contents,  but  also  those 
of  Buxtorf ,  with  additional  remarks  by  the  editor. 

Biblia  Hebraica,  cum  Latina  Versione  Sebastiana  Mun- 
STERi.     Basileas,  1534,  1535,  2  vols,  folio. 

Hebraicorum  Bibliorum  Veteris  Testamenti  Latina 
Interpretatio,  opera  olim  Xantis  Pagnini,  Lucensis:  nunc 
verb  Benedicti  Ariae  Montani,  Hispalensis,  Francisci  Raphel- 
engii,  Alnetani,  Guidonis  et  Nicolai  Fabriciorum  Boderiano- 
rum  fratrum  collato  studio,  ad  Hebraicam  dictionem  diligen- 
tissim^  expensa.  Christ.  Plantinus  Antwerpiae  excudebat, 
1571.     Folio. 

This  is  the  first  edition  executed  by  Plantin,  and  is  re- 
puted to  be  the  most  correct. 

Biblia  Sacra  Hebraea  correcta,  et  collata  cum  antiquis- 
simis  exemplaribus  manuscriptis  et  hactenus  impressis. 
Amstelodami.  Typis  et  sumtibus  Josephi  Athiae.  1661, 
1667,  ^vo. 

An  extremely  rare  edition  of  a  most  beautifully  executed 
Hebrew  Bible.  The  impression  of  1667  is  said  to  be  the 
most  correct. 

Biblia  Hebraica,  cum  not  is  Hebraicis  et  Lemmatibus 
Latinis,  ex  recensione  Dan.  Em.  Jablonski,  cum  ejus  Pr^E- 
fatione  Latina.     Berolini,   1699,  large  8vo. 

De  Rossi  considers  this  to  be  one  of  the  most  correct  and 
important  editions  of  the  Hebrew  Bible  ever  printed.  It  is 
extremely  scarce. 

Biblia  Hebraica,  edente  Everardo  Van  der  Hooght. 
Amstelodami  et  Ultrajecti,  8vo.  2  vols.  1705. 

A  work  of  singular  beauty  and  rarity.  The  Hebrew  text 
is  printed  after  Athias '  second  edition,  with  marginal  notes 
pointing  out  the  contents  of  each  section.     The  characters, 


/" 


636     THE  HEBREW  TEXT  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

especially  the  vowel  points,  are  uncommonly  clear  and  dis- 
tinct. At  the  end,  Van  der  Hooght  has  given  the  various 
lections  occuring  in  the  editions  of  Bomberg,  Plantin,  Athias 
and  others. 

Biblia  Hebraica  cum  notis  criticis,  et  Versione  Latina  ad 
notas  criticas  facta.  Accedunt  Libri  Graeci,  qui  Deutero- 
canonici  vocantur,  in  tres  Classes  distributi.  Autore  Carolo 
Francisco  Houbigant.  Lutetiae  Parisiorum,  1753,  4  vols, 
folio. 

This  text  of  this  edition  is  that  of  Van  der  Hooght,  with- 
out points ;  and  in  the  margin  of  the  Pentateuch,  Houbigant 
has  added  various  readings  from  the  Samaritan  Pentateuch. 

Vetus  Testamentum  Hebraicum,  cum  variis  Lectionibus. 
Edidit  Benjaminus  Kennicott,  S.  T.  P.  Oxonii,  1776,  1780, 
2  vols,  folio. 

This  splendid  work  was  preceded  by  two  dissertations  on 
the  state  of  the  Hebrew  text,  published  in  1753  and  1759,  the 
object  of  which  was  to  show  the  necessity  of  the  same  exten- 
sive collation  of  Hebrew  manuscripts  of  the  Old  Testament 
as  had  already  been  undertaken  for  the  Greek  manuscripts 
of  the  New  Testament.  The  utility  of  the  proposed  collation 
being  generally  admitted,  a  very  liberal  subscription  was 
made  to  defray  the  expense  of  the  collation,  amounting  on 
the  whole  to  nearly  ten  thousand  pounds,  and  the  name  of 
his  Majesty  King  George  HI.  headed  the  list  of  subscribers. 
Various  persons  were  employed  both  at  home  and  abroad; 
but  of  the  foreign  literati,  the  principal  was  Professor  Bruns, 
of  the  University  of  Helmstadt,  who  not  only  collated  He- 
brew manuscripts  in  Germany,  but  went  for  that  purpose 
into  Italy  and  Switzerland.  The  business  of  collation  con- 
tinued from  1760  to  1769,  inclusive,  during  which  period 
Kennicott  published  annually  an  account  of  the  progress 
which  was  made.  More  than  six  hundred  Hebrew  manu- 
scripts, and  sixteen  manuscripts  of  the  Samaritan  Penta- 
teuch, were  discovered  in  different  libraries  in  England  and 
on  the  Continent,  many  of  which  were  wholly  collated,  and 
others  consulted  in  important  passages.  Several  years 
necessarily  elapsed,  after  the  collations  were  finished,  before 
the  materials  could  be  arranged  and  digested  for  publication. 


THE   SAMARITAN    CODEX  637 

The  variations,  contained  in  nearly  seven  hundred  bundles 
of  papers,  being  at  length  digested  (including  the  collations 
made  by  Professor  Bruns) ,  and  the  whole,  when  put  together, 
being  corrected  by  the  original  collations,  and  then  fairly 
transcribed  into  thirty  folio  volumes,  the  work  was  put  to 
press  in  1773.  ^^  ^77^  ^^^  ^^^t  volume  of  Kennicott's 
Hebrew  Bible  was  delivered  to  the  public,  and  in  1780  the 
second  volume. 

The  text  of  Kennicott  's  edition  was  printed  from  that 
of  Van  der  Hooght,  with  which  the  Hebrew  manuscripts,  by 
Kennicott 's  direction,  were  all  collated.  But,  as  variations 
in  the  points  were  disregarded  in  the  collation,  the  points 
were  not  added  in  the  text.  The  various  readings,  as  in  the 
critical  editions  of  the  Greek  Testament,  were  printed  at  the 
bottom  of  the  page,  with  references  to  the  corresponding 
readings  of  the  text.  In  the  Pentateuch,  the  deviations  of 
the  Samaritan  text  were  printed  in  a  column  parallel  to  the 
Hebrew;  and  the  variations  observable  in  the  Samaritan 
manuscripts,  which  differ  from  each  other  as  well  as  the 
Hebrew,  are  likewise  noted,  with  references  to  the  Samari- 
tan printed  text. 

To  Kennicott's  Hebrew  Bible,  M.  de  Rossi  published  an 
important  supplement  at  Parma  (i 784-1 787),  in  four  vol- 
umes 4to  of  VaricB  Lectiones  Veteris  Testamenti.  This  work 
and  Kennicott 's  edition  form  one  complete  set  of  collations. 
Of  the  immense  mass  of  various  readings  which  the  coll'ations 
of  Kennicott  and  M.  de  Rossi  exhibit,  multitudes  are  insig- 
nificant, consisting  frequently  of  the  omission  or  addition 
of  a  single  letter  in  a  word,  as  a  vau,  etc. 

Closely  allied  in  history  with  the  Hebrew  text  is  the 
Samaritan  Codex. 

When  the  ten  tribes  seceded  from  the  central  government 
under  Rehoboam,  and  set  up  an  independent  government 
under  Jeroboam  at  Samaria,  they  were  always  regarded  by 
those  who  had  remained  faithful  to  Solomon's  issue  in  the 
kingdom  of  Juda,  as  prevaricators.  Many  fierce  and  bloody 
wars  were  waged  between  the  two  kingdoms,  till  the  Assy- 
rians overthrew  the  kingdom  of  Israel,  and  took  her  sons 
captive  (721  B.C.).     To  inhabit  the  land  of  Israel  thus  made 


638  THE   SAMARITAN    CODEX 

desolate,  the  Assyrian  monarchs  sent  thither  colonists  from 
the  provinces  of  Babylon,  from  Cutha,  Ava,  Hamath,  Se- 
pharvaim.  The  remnants  of  Jews  that  had  been  left  in  the 
land  intermarried  with  these  foreign  colonists,  and  thus  a 
mongrel  race  was  formed  that  was  termed  Samaritans,  from 
the  name  of  the  chief  city  of  their  land.  Samaria,  Heb.  Sho- 
meron,  was  thus  called  because  it  w^as  built  on  a  hill  pur- 
chased from  one  Shomer.  At  first  they  brought  with  them 
their  heterodox  idolatry,  which  ignored  Yahveh.  It  would 
be  dangerous  to  allow  such  a  people  to  entrench  themselves 
so  close  to  Judah,  and  carry  on  a  false  worship  of  the  Assy- 
rian gods,  so  Yahveh  sent  upon  them  lions  to  ravage  their 
land,  to  show  that  they  must  recognize  him.  Moved  by  this 
scourge,  Assarhaddon,  [Assur-ah-iddin]  the  Assyrian  mon- 
arch, sent  to  them  one  of  Israel 's  priests,  that  had  been  taken 
captive,  to  teach  them  the  religion  of  Yahveh.  The  poly- 
theism of  the  Assyrians  admitted  of  any  number  of  gods,  and 
it  was  thought  by  them  that  the  punishment  had  come  upon 
the  colonists  simply  because  they  ignored  the  god  of  the  land. 
That  is,  they  believed  that  the  land  had  a  particular  deity, 
who  was  to  be  united  in  worship  to  the  other  particular  dei- 
ties which  they  worshiped.  The  knowledge  that  the  captive 
priest  gave  them  of  Yahveh  did  not,  in  effect,  exclude  the 
worship  of  their  own  deities.  They  recognized  Yahveh  only 
as  a  particular  god  of  the  land,  and  though  they  built  tem- 
ples to  him,  his  worship  was  held  in  an  inferior  rank,  for  they 
chose  as  Yahveh 's  priests  the  lowest  of  the  people.  They 
neglected  the  supreme  and  exclusive  character  of  Yahveh 's 
worship,  and  must  have  considered  such  demands  by  Yahveh 
as  a  jealous  exclusiveness,  which  they  could  not  sanction. 
So  that  at  the  same  time  that  they  maintained  a  sort  of  wor- 
ship of  Yahveh  every  nation  worshiped  its  own  particular 
deity.  For  the  men  of  Babylon  made  Succoth  Benoth,  and 
the  Cuthites  made  Nerghal,  and  the  men  of  Hamath  made 
Ashima,  and  the  men  of  Ava  made  Nibhaz  and  Thartack, 
and  they  that  were  of  Sepharvaim  burnt  their  children  in  fire 
to  Adrammelech  and  Anammelech,  the  gods  of  Sepharvaim 
(II.  Kings  XVII.  30,  31).  Such  was  the  origin  and  religion 
of  the  Samaritans.     They  have  a  copy  of  the  Pentateuch,  in 


THE    SAMARITAN    CODEX  639 

which  the  Hebrew  words  are  inscribed  in  Samaritan  char- 
acters. The  date  of  this  is  uncertain,  but  it  certainly  must 
go  back  to  the  time  of  the  captive  priest,  sent  thither  to 
instruct  them.  He  could  not  well  do  this  without  a  copy  of 
the  Law.  It  is  not  improbable  that  its  date  would  go  back 
even  further,  to  the  founding  of  the  kingdom  of  Israel  under 
Jeroboam. 

Although  the  Samaritan  Pentateuch  was  known  to  and 
cited  by  Eusebius,  Cyril  of  Alexandria,  Procopius  of  Gaza, 
Diodorus  of  Tarsus,  Jerome,  Syncellus,  and  other  ancient 
writers,  yet  it  afterwards  fell  into  oblivion  for  upwards  of  a 
thousand  years,  so  that  its  very  existence  began  to  be  ques- 
tioned. Joseph  Scaliger  was  the  first  who  excited  the  atten- 
tion of  learned  men  to  this  valuable  relic  of  antiquity ;  and 
M.  Peiresc  procured  a  copy  from  Egypt,  which,  together 
with  the  ship  that  brought  it,  was  unfortunately  captured  by 
pirates.  More  successful  was  Ussher,  who  procured  six  copies 
from  the  East ;  and  from  another  copy,  purchased  by  Pietro 
della  Valle  for  M.  de  Sancy  (then  ambassador  from  France  to 
Constantinople,  and  afterwards  Archbishop  of  St.  Maloes), 
Father  Morinus  printed  the  Samaritan  Pentateuch,  for  the 
first  time,  in  the  Paris  Polyglot.  This  was  afterwards 
reprinted  in  the  London  Polyglot  by  Walton,  who  corrected 
it  from  three  manuscripts  which  had  formerly  belonged  to 
Ussher. 

The  Samaritans  refuse  to  marry  into  any  other  tribe  of 
men,  and  they  are  now  reduced  to  less  than  two  hundred 
souls. 

There  are  three  scrolls  preserved  at  Nabulus  of  the  Sam- 
aritan Codex.  One  of  these  is  regarded  with  great  reverence 
and  rarely  shown  to  travellers.  We  were  able  to  see  it  in 
1905.  It  is  kept  behind  a  veil  in  a  case  of  solid  silver  and 
has  marks  of  great  antiquity. 

Of  the  Samaritan  Pentateuch  two  versions  are  extant; 
one  in  the  proper  Samaritan  dialect,  which  is  usually  termed 
the  Samaritan  Version,  and  another  in  Arabic. 

We  here  reproduce  on  the  following  page  a  specimen  of 
the  Samaritan  Codex,  and  its  Samaritan  translation  from 
Walton's  Polyglot.     The  passage  is  from  Genesis,  I.  1-14. 


tf:x:ti]S  herr^q-sama^ 


RITANUS. 


it/or  !i«*t»2y(ir!i;/7r2^*i:fnr^v^i32^*uV^A--^2*^nT^^*^2ar2^ 


VERSIO    SAMARITANA. 


/rr:^        yV^s2v»^i3*"^^**nT!;i?r7r^^'5fiif.yv^»M»iVt5:9(»^y/3i^t5.  -k 

3[^   ^ii*^m*^.^2^*^^^^  ^  •4^i^'^t^^*^^i^*3[^^*B[3t2yv:| 
*^«^^i3nfa^*^^^:^*inT^*^^2A^'^^3^^:3^*yt2^ 
!aar2*py^*3[ij^i^2t:Ji?^r7ryfe*^^^i2*.^^2y\;»pv^i:* 

A-2P*^w*^^2A^*lrakV^  '^^  *^nr5ij2*^/7rij?*iinTa'*«.^:iii;  7 
^oria     .     •i/Tr5^*^nf^>p2*nr^iaii^'y*^arii/*iir7r^'»^^:iA^ 
^nr.vV:iP2*^^2/V'Pv^^  ^  :!;vijT*^^^^*^nryt2P2*2v2iii?^ 

ly  t^*/7rA•iJiy^*^[w^'i^***i^i5A•/7r*^^2A^*^iyiV^^  **  9 

i3/7r*pV^*5[rTr2i/*i^*^!a5dii^2t»*^v'^yV'^>^ar7r2*^^2A 

'=^A^'MTtJt*%^ZA-''^^/f'^  ^  :5^*v^2^*^^2a:*^^^^ 

:i»^avm'^3*ii2i7rA^t:2ti*^v^^^*2i^v*^Am 

jiiA^^  *  :iiii^*^^^^*5iv^yV*2v^a»5Ev^^'=y*^^ii2 

t : ^^^ it 2* :Si:222' 2222;3   *a:^v^ A^or* ^v^ a 

2A%livir*3i.^^iii2*^a*^A-^3w^p*s**/7r^2*^/Trav 

5f/7r  i5^^'.p?2:^a*iir?r<^/7r^i^*nr^/7r*^^2/V*^^A^^  '^^  14 

;/1t2  nr2*^m  ^^♦^iy^w*i3nt2i»p^3iy2^*^v'=^yV*2v*^«i^ii5y2 
liam-       ;^'  ^*iym'ii;^rTri;^*ijnr!i^v2ri/ffhiynr^2*^i^/7r^ 


pv 
^A-p 


fVERS.SA.COpcrflansfa 
per  /"fcicm  aqux(fc')  feminantcm  (c)  progermiaantcm  gcrnicn  Cd^  rilantam  (Ocujas  fruiftificatio  in  tcirrfa citcn orbccoeli 


TtXT.ETVEH.SAl 
Ti  an  flat  10  Latina 


t 


10 


n 


10 


II 


12 


CAP.  I. 
Princii>io  crcazik  t 
us  c&lum  e>  ttiYam.  Ti 
raautemcr^  inank  ( 
^'^f«^,  &  tenebr^  era 
fiipcrfmm  ahyffi:fpi: 
tiis  qiioquc  Dei  (a)fe-i 
batur  fupc'f  aqurns.  I 
xUqueDeiMyfiatlttx,  ( 
faCia  eflWX'kt  vldt  L 
m  liKepn  quod  bond  ejfe 
Et  feparavit  Dem  hit 
tucem  &  inter. tcmb/A 
VdcavitqUe  Viiis  lucei. 
dim^  &'t;tntbras  voc 
vit  noUem:  ^tfa^lim  i 
vcjpere y,  jfa^iimqite  t 
mane^dics  unm.  Etdix 
Deus,  fiat  ftrmamentu. 
in  medio  aquamm  :fcpi 
ret  que  aquas  ab  airm.  1 
fecit  Dem  fimamentum 
fcparavitque  aquas  qa 
trant  fubier.  pmamci 
turn  ah  ayds  qux  erai 
fuper  firtmmenium:  d 
^a^umeft  tta.  Vocavh 
jue  Deus  firmithehtun 
ccelum :  Etfa^um  eft  vi 
pe'/^,  fadiumque  efi  trn 
nCydies fecundm,  Etd\ 
xii  DeuSy'  conp-e^entu 
aqu^ie,quafubccclofunt  i 
licum  umm^  &  apparea 
mda_:  &fa6iime^it(^ 
Et  vocavptp^sm  aridm 
lerram^  &''iin'i^vegaxion 
iqfiamH0t:uutj/ima 
iidit?ji^pem.<iHodbBn. 

'fet.,  Et4mt-Pmv^ 

minet te^a-d&h^'m  vi 
rentem,  (h)fAcientem  ft 
men ;  d^  arborem  fru 
lifcram',  facientem  in 
kim  ficundum  jpedci 
fiiamycujus  fcmm  fit  i 
eafiiperteY/am  :  iyf^ 
fcum  eft  ita^  Produxkqv 
terra  herbam  virenii  (c 
facientem  femejtfecmdi 
fj?ec  iemfua:&(d)arbor 
i  m:ntefi'u6fu(e)bAbcnt 
jewcn  in  feraetipfa^fccun 
dim  fpeciemfuam:  Et  z'l 
dit  Dctis  quod  bo/ifl  efjh 
Et  factum  eft  vcfpercj'ii 
clumq-y  efi  mane,  dies  tn 
tins.  EtdixitDeuSjf/a>i 
luminana  in(f)firmaf/m 
to  cceHy  ut  luccant  jupc 


terram,  &  feparcnt  d^i 

a  no^e :  pntquc  in  jign^ 

^  injepipora^  &  in  dies 

*-&  mnos. 


THE  HEBREW  TEXT  641 

Justin  (martyr),  Origen,  Chrysostom,  the  pseudo  Atha- 
nasius,  Tertullian,  Jerome  and  others  accused  the  Jews  of 
corrupting  the  Scriptures.* 

Martianay,  Nicolas  of  Lyra,  Paul  of  Burgos,  Salmeron, 
Melchior  Canus,  Morini,  and  others  also  have  laid  this 
accusation  upon  them.f 

Jerome,  in  another  place,  stoutly  defends  the  integrity  of 
the  Hebrew  text.  Augustine,  Sixtus  of  Sienna,  Bellarmine, 
Genebrard,  Mariana,  Richard  Simon  and  others  have  also  de- 
fended   its    integrity,  t 

In  studying  the  question,  we  are  led  to  the  following  con- 
clusions :  I . — They  err  greatly  who  believe  that  any  extensive 
corruption  was  wrought  into  the  Hebrew  text  in  hatred  of 
the  Messiah.  That  such  corruption  could  not  have  been 
wrought  before  the  time  of  the  Christ  is  self-evident.  There 
was  lacking  the  motive  for  such  movement,  and,  moreover, 
had  it  been  done  in  hatred  of  the  Messiah,  he  would  have 
charged  them  with  this  great  crime.  That  such  corruption 
were  wrought  after  the  advent  of  Christ  is  disproven  first 
from  the  impossibility  of  the  work.  There  were  many  codices 
scattered  abroad  through  the  world,  several  of  which  were 
in  possession  of  those  who  would  not  conspire  in  such  under- 
taking. No  system  would  suffice  to  reach  them  all.  And, 
moreover,  some  of  the  sublimest  of  the  Messianic  prophecies 
never  arrive,  in  their  translations,  at  the  grandeur  that  they 
have  in  the  original.     We  believe,  also,  that  the  Providence 

*S.  lustin.  c.  Tryph.  71,  72,  etc.  (M.  6,  644) ;  S.  Iren.  c.  haer.  III.  21 ;  IV. 
12  (M.  7,  946,  1004) ;  Origen.  Ep.  ad  Afric.  9;  in  lerem.  horn.  16.  10  (M.  12, 
65  sqq.;  13,  449  sqq.) ;  S.  Chrys.  in  Matth.  horn.  5,  2  (M.  57);  Ps.  Athan. 
Synops.  S.S.  78  (in  textu  latino  tantum;  M.  28,  438) ;  Tertull.  decultufem. 
I.  3  (M.  I,  1308);  S.  Hier.  in  Gal.  3,  10  (M.  26,  357). 


fRaym.  Mart.  Pug.  fid.  II.  3,  9  p.  277;  Lyran.  et  Paulus  Burg,  in  Os. 
9;  Salmer.  Proleg.  4;  Cani  Loci  theol.  II.  13 ;  Morin.  Exercit.  bibl,  I.  i,  2  p. 
7  sqq.  eorum  et  aliorum  multorum  testimonia  recitat. 


JS.  Hier.  in  Is.  6,  9  (M.  24,  99) ;  S.  Aug.  De  Civ.  D.  XV.  13  (M.  41,  452); 
Bellarm.  De  verbo  Dei  II.  2;  Sim.  de  Muis  Triplex  assertio  pro  veritate 
hebraica.  Opp.  II.  p.  131  sqq.;  Genebrard  in  Ps.  21,  19;  Sixt.  Sen.  Biblioth. 
s.  VIII.  haer.  13 ;  loan.  Mariana  Pro  Vulgata  c.  7 ;  Rich.  Sim.  Hist.  crit.  du 
V.  T.  III.  18;  Marchini  De  divin.  et  canonic,  libr.  sacr.  I.  6;  Lamy  Introd. 
in  S.  S.  I.  p.  83  sqq.;  Reinke  Beitraege  VII.  p.  292  sqq.,  etc.  etc. 

41  (H.S.) 


642  THE    GREEK   TEXT   OF    THE   NEW   TESTAMENT 

of  God  would  not  permit  that  code  to  be  essentially  corrupted 
in  which  he  had  first  covenanted  with  the  chosen  people. 
But  it  is  not  our  mind  to  deny  that  an  occasional  corruption 
has  been  wilfully  fastened  upon  the  Hebrew  text.  Hatred 
of  the  Messiah  is  bound  up  in  the  heart  of  the  Jew.  Now,  as 
they  were  the  chief  custodians  of  the  Hebrew  text,  it  is  quite 
probable  that,  wherever  the  reading  or  the  sense  was  doubt- 
ful, they  would  incline  to  that  reading  or  interpretation 
which  was  less  favorable  to  the  Messiah.  Again,  some  cer- 
tain texts  may  have  been  deliberately  corrupted  in  some 
codices,  whence  the  corruption  spread,  and  gradually  inva- 
ded them  all.  This  we  admit,  but  it  is  in  so  small  a  part 
that  it  does  not  rob  the  great  text  of  its  value. 

The  corruption  of  one  passage,  or  the  attempt  to  obscure 
the  sense  of  a  passage,  would  have  sufficed  to  bring  upon  the 
Jews  the  accusations  spoken  of  in  the  Fathers.  Moreover,  it 
is  not  clear  that  the  Fathers  charged  them  with  changing  the 
the  Hebrew  text,  but  rather  with  obscuring  the  sense,  or  that 
they  rejected  the  Septuagint.  Justin,  it  is  true  (1.  c), 
accuses  them  of  deliberate  mutilations,  but  an  examination 
of  the  passages  does  not  substantiate  his  charge.  The  rejec- 
tion by  the  Jews  of  the  deuterocanonical  books  might  also 
have  been  taken  by  the  Fathers  as  a  corruption  of  Scripture. 

We  believe,  therefore,  that  the  way  of  truth  lies  in  a 
middle  course.  We  admit  that  some  passages  of  the  Hebrew 
text  are  corrupted,  but  we  believe  that  in  the  main  it  is 
authentic,  and  of  the  greatest  value  for  him  who  would  arrive 
at  the  deeper  sense  of  the  message  of  the  Old  Law. 

Chapter  XVII. 
The  Greek  Text  of  the  New  Testament. 

We  have  before  spoken  of  the  evidence  of  the  Providence 
of  God  in  bringing  about  a  state  of  peace  in  the  civilized 
world,  preceding  the  advent  of  Christ.  It  is  also  attributable 
to  this  benign  Providence  that  one  universal  tongue  was  the 
medium  of  thought  in  this  vast  extent  of  the  habitable  globe. 
When,  therefore,  the  Apostles  entered  upon  the  execution  of 
the  mandate  of  Christ  to  teach  all  nations,  they  adopted  the 


THE   GREEK   TEXT   OF   THE   NEW    TESTAMENT  643 

Greek  language  which  was  the  great  medium  of  thought 
among  the  nations. 

After  the  Macedonians  had  subjugated  the  whole  of 
Greece,  and  extended  their  dominion  into  Asia  and  Africa, 
the  refined  and  elegant  Attic  began  to  decline ;  and  all  the 
dialects  being  by  degrees  mixed  together,  there  arose  a  cer- 
tain peculiar  language,  called  the  Common,  and  also  the  Hel- 
lenic; but  more  especially,  since  the  empire  of  the  Macedo- 
nians was  the  chief  cause  of  its  introduction  into  the  general 
use  from  the  time  of  Alexander  onwards,  it  was  called  the 
(later)  Macedonic.  This  dialect  was  composed  from  almost  all 
the  dialects  of  Greece,  together  with  very  many  foreign  words 
borrowed  from  the  Persians,  Syrians,  Hebrews,  and  other 
nations  who  became  connected  with  the  Macedonian  people 
after  the  age  of  Alexander.  Now,  of  this  Macedonian 
dialect,  the  dialect  of  Alexandria  (which  was  the  lan- 
guage of  all  the  inhabitants  of  that  city,  as  well  of 
the  learned  as  of  the  Jews,)  was  a  degenerate  pro- 
geny far  more  corrupt  than  the  common  Macedo- 
nian dialect.  This  last  mentioned  common  dialect, 
being  the  current  Greek  spoken  throughout  Western  Asia, 
was  made  use  of  by  the  writers  of  the  Greek  Testament. 

"The  materials  on  which  writing  has  been  impressed 
at  different  periods  and  stages  of  civilization  are  the  follow- 
ing: Leaves,  bark,  especially  of  the  lime  (liber),  linen,  clay 
and  pottery,  wall-spaces,  metals,  lead,  bronze,  wood,  waxen 
and  other  tablets,  papyrus,  skins,  parchment  and  vellum, 
and  from  an  early  date  amongst  the  Chinese,  and  in  the  West 
after  the  capture  of  Samarcand  by  the  Arabs  in  a.d.  704, 
paper  manufactured  from  fibrous  substances.  The  most 
ancient  manuscripts  of  the  New  Testament  now  existing  are 
composed  of  vellum  or  parchment  (membrana),  the  term 
vellum  being  strictly  applied  to  the  delicate  skins  of  very 
young  calves,  and  parchment  to  the  integuments  of  sheep 
and  goats,  though  the  terms  are  as  a  rule  employed  convert- 
ibly.  The  word  parchment  seems  to  be  a  corruption  of 
charta  pergamena,  sl  name  first  given  to  skins  prepared  by 
some  improved  process  for  Eumenes,  king  of  Pergamum, 
about  B.  c.  150.     In  judging  of  the  date  of  a  manuscript  on 


644  THE   GREEK   TEXT   OF    THE   NEW   TESTAMENT. 

skins,  attention  must  be  paid  to  the  quality  of  the  material, 
the  oldest  being  almost  invariably  written  on  the  thinnest 
and  whitest  vellum  that  could  be  procured;  while  manu- 
scripts of  later  ages,  being  usually  composed  of  parchment, 
are  thick,  discolored,  and  coarsely  grained.  Thus  the 
Codex  Sinaiticus  of  the  fourth  century  is  made  of  the  finest 
skins  of  antelopes,  the  leaves  being  so  large,  that  a  single 
animal  would  furnish  only  two  (Tischendorf,  Cod.  Frid. 
August.  Prol.)  Paper  made  of  cotton  (charta  homhycina, 
called  also  charta  Damascena  from  its  place  of  manufacture) 
may  have  been  fabricated  in  the  ninth  or  tenth  century,  and 
linen  paper  {charta  proper)  as  early  as  1242  a.d.  ;  but  they 
were  seldom  used  for  Biblical  manuscripts  sooner  than  the 
thirteenth,  and  had  not  entirely  displaced  parchment  at  the 
era  of  the  invention  of  printing,  about  a.d.  1450. 

"All  manuscripts,  the  most  ancient  not  excepted,  have 
erasures  and  corrections ;  which,  however,  were  not  always 
effected  so  dexterously,  but  that  the  original  writing  may 
sometimes  be  seen.  Where  these  alterations  have  been  made 
by  the  copyist  of  the  manuscript,  (a  prima  manu^  as  it  is 
termed,)  they  are  preferable  to  those  made  by  later  hands, 
or  a  secunda  manu.  These  erasures  were  sometimes  made 
by  drawing  a  line  through  the  word,  or  what  is  tenfold 
worse,  by  the  penknife.  But,  besides  these  modes  of  obliter- 
ation, the  copyist  frequently  blotted  out  the  old  writing 
with  a  sponge,  and  wrote  other  words  in  lieu  of  it ;  nor  was 
this  practice  confined  to  a  single  letter  or  word,  as  may  be 
seen  in  the  Codex  Bezae.  Authentic  instances  are  on  record 
in  which  whole  books  have  been  thus  obliterated,  and  other 
writing  has  been  substituted  in  place  of  the  manuscript  so 
blotted  out;  but  where  the  writing  was  already  faded 
through  age,  they  preserved  their  transcriptions  without 
further  erasure. 

"These  manuscripts  are  termed  Codices  Palimpsesti  or 
Rescripti.  Before  the  invention  of  paper,  the  great  scarcity 
of  parchment  in  different  places  induced  many  persons  to 
obliterate  the  works  of  ancient  writers,  in  order  to  tran- 
scribe their  own,  or  those  of  some  other  favorite  author  in 
their  place ;  hence,  doubtless,  the   works  of  many  eminent 


THE   GREEK   TEXT   OF    THE   NEW   TESTAMENT  645 

writers  have  perished,  and  particularly  those  of  the  greatest 
antiquity ;  for  such  as  were  comparatively  recent  were  tran- 
scribed to  satisfy  the  immediate  demand,  while  those  which 
were  already  dim  with  age  were  erased. 

"In  general,  a  Codex  Rescriptus  is  easily  known,  as  it 
rarely  happens  that  the  former  writing  is  so  completely 
erased,  as  not  to  exhibit  some  traces;  in  a  few  instances, 
both  writings  are  legible.  The  indefatigable  researches  of 
Cardinal  Angelo  Mai  (for  some  time  the  principal  keeper  of 
the  Vatican  Library  at  Rome)  have  discovered  several  valu- 
able remains  of  biblical  and  classical  literature  in  the  Am- 
brosian  Library  at  Milan." 

The  Scriptures  were  not  formerly  as  now  divided  into 
chapters  and  verses.  The  mode  of  designating  particular 
passages  was  by  specifying  the  theme.  Thus  Jesus  Christ 
designates  to  the  Sadducees  the  passage  from  Exodus  treat- 
ing of  the  resurrection  of  the  dead,  Mark  XII.  26 :  "  And  as 
concerning  the  dead  that  they  rise  again,  have  you  not  read 
in  the  book  of  Moses,  how  in  the  bush,  God  spoke  to  him  say- 
ing :  *  I  am  the  God  of  Abraham,  and  the  God  of  Isaac,  and 
the  God  of  Jacob?'  "  This  method  presupposed  those  to 
whom  the  discourse  was  directed  to  be  much  versed  in  the 
Scriptures.  The  first  attempt  at  fixed  divisions  of  Scripture 
seems  to  have  been  made  by  Ammonius  of  Alexandria,  the 
contemporary  of  Origen.  The  first  attempts  were  rude  and 
imperfect. 

Ammonius  (A.  D.  220),  selected  as  his  standard  the  Gos- 
pel of  Matthew,  and  arranged  in  parallel  columns  by  its 
side  passages  from  the  other  Gospels ;  thus  of  necessity  divid- 
ing the  text  into  sections  which  have  been  called  the  Am- 
monian  sections.  Eusebius  was  perhaps  influenced  by  the 
labors  of  Ammonius  in  dividing  the  Gospel  text  into  sections 
which  have  been  called  the  Eusebian  Canons. 

In  the  thirteenth  century  Cardinal  Hugh  of  S.  Carus,  the 
inventor  of  the  Concordances  of  Scripture,  is  believed  to 
have  been  the  first  to  divide  the  Scriptures  into  chapters. 
Some,  however,  attribute  this  work  to  Stephen  Langton,  the 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  of  the  same  century.  This  mode 
of  division  passed  from  the  Vulgate  to  the  primal  texts,  and 


646      THE  GREEK  TEXT  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT 

later  even  the  Hebrew  text  was  thus  divided.  The  subdi- 
visions of  the  chapters  were  in  this  system  marked  by  the 
letters  of  the  alphabet.  The  distinction  and  enumeration 
of  the  verses  is  due  to  Robert  Etienne,  the  celebrated  printer 
of  Paris,  who  first  thus  divided  the  Holy  Scriptures  in  his 
edition  of  the  Vulgate  in  1548.  This  system  was  also  soon 
applied  to  all  the  texts  of  Scripture.  The  division  of  the 
Scriptures  into  chapters  and  verses  is  the  pure  work  of 
man,  and  subject  to  critical  analysis,  and  may  be  altered  if 
good  data  w^arrant  a  different  division.  In  fact,  in  many 
cases  it  is  expedient  to  change  the  divisions  of  Robert 
Etienne,  as  also  the  chapter  divisions. 

The  Scriptures  were  also  in  the  beginning  written  with- 
out any  elements  of  punctuation  or  accentuation.  By  this 
mode  of  writing  the  page  presented  one  compact  mass  of 
characters,  and  their  division  and  construction  into  words 
were  left  to  the  reader's  judgment.     See  plate  on  page  647. 

This  mode  of  writing  remained  in  vogue  till  about  the 
ninth  century  of  the  Christian  Era.  As  by  different  group- 
ings, and  combinations  of  characters,  different  meanings 
resulted  from  the  text  this  was  a  fertile  cause  cf  error, 
and  many  of  the  variantia  are  traceable  to  this  cause. 

A  system  of  accentuation  had  been  invented  by  Aris- 
tophanes of  Byzantium  in  the  second  century  before  Christ, 
which  was  employed  by  the  Greek  grammarians  in  the  works 
of  profane  argument.  Its  application  to  the  Sacred  Codices 
was  rare.  St.  Epiphanius  testifies  that  certain  ones  have 
thus  written  copies  of  the  Alexandrine  Codex  of  the  Old  Test- 
ament, but  Tischendorf  affirms  that  no  Codex  anterior  to  the 
eighth  century  is  written  with  accents.  It  is  only  after  the 
tenth  century  that  accentuation  becomes  general.  This  was 
also  a  source  of  variantia,  as  the  different  positions  of  the 
accents  oft  induced  a  different  meaning.  In  some  of  the  old 
codices,  as  for  instance  the  Codex  Sinaiticus  the  spiritus 
lenis  and  gravis  are  indicated,  but  this  is  judged  by  Tischen- 
dorf to  be  the  work  of  a  later  hand.  More  ancient  than  the 
use  of  either  accents  or  signs  of  punctuation  is  the  use  of  the 
lineola, — ,  to  designate  the  abbreviation  of  certain  words  of 
more  frequent  occurrence.   Thus:  0C  for  ©eo?,  KC  ioT/cvpio';^ 


THE   GREEK  TEXT  OF  THE   NEW  TESTAMENT  647 


IINA  for  TTvevfia.  The  iota  subscript  is  never  found  in  the 
old  Codices  of  Holy  Writ,  hence  another  cause  of  error.  How 
these  different  factors  effected  many  divergencies  in  the 
Sacred  text  may  be  inferred  from  the  following  examples. 

The  group  of  letters  avrrj  became  avrrj  or  avr^  or  avTrj; 
every  one  of  different  import  by  modifications  which  can 
only  be  based  upon  the  fallible,  varying,  judgments  of  men. 
The  opening  verses  of  St.  John's  Gospel  form  a  good  speci- 
men of  the  difference  in  interpretation  which  may  result 
from  different  insertion  of  the  sign  of  punctuation. 

The  Vulgate  and  its  dependent  versions  insert  the  period 
after  yeyovev.  ''Without  him  was  made  nothing  that  was 
made.  In  him  was  life. "  etc.  St.  Irenseus,  St.  Clement  of 
Alexandria,  Origen,  St.  Athanasius,  and  others  close  the 
period  after  ovBe  ev;  whence  would  result:  ''Without  him 
was  made  nothing.     What  was  made  was  life  in  him.  " 

To  remove  this  cause  of  error  Origen  in  his  Hexapla 
divided  the  text  into  orr^ot,  and  this  mode  of  writing  was 
termed  aTix^fxerpCa.  In  this  stichometric  arrangement  of 
the  text,  every  complete  phrase  occupied  a  separate  line. 

St.  Jerome  wrote  in  this  manner  his  version  of  the  pro- 
phetical books  of  the  Old  Testament.  In  the  middle  of  the 
fifth  century  Euthalius,  a  deacon  of  Alexandria,  employed 
this  mode  of  writing  in  his  successive  editions  of  the  Pauline 
Epistles,  of  the  Catholic  Epistles  and  the  Acts,  and  of  the 
Gospels.  As  this  served  well  the  convenience  of  the  reader  it 
became  quite  general  in  those  early  codices,  although  but  few 
thus  written  are  extant  to-day.  Principal  among  those  that 
remain  are  the  Codex  Bezae  of  Cambridge  (D)  of  the  Gospels 
and  Acts ;  the  Codex  of  Clermont  (D)  of  the  Pauline  Epistles ; 
the  Codex  of  St.  Germain  (E)  of  the  Pauline  Epistles;  and 
the  Codex  Coislinianus  (H)  of  the  Pauline  Epistles. 

This  mode  of  writing,  though  very  convenient  to  the 
reader,  required  much  material  upon  which  to  be  written,  as 
large  portions  of  the  superficies  remained  blank. 

We  reproduce  on  the  following  page  a  specimen  of 
stichometry  from  the  Codex  of  Beza;  Math.  XXIV;  51- 
XXV.  6,  with  English  translation  in  same  form  of  writing. 


648       THE  GREEK  TEXT  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT 

KAtOBryrMOCTODNIOAOMTCDM 
Cl^H       TOTeOMOlCU!9HC6TMHBA.ClAeiXTCONOYT^Na3M 

AeKMnr^jeeMoic  MTiMecA^Boyc^i 
exH\eoMeicATiXMTHCiNToY^»Y^4^«oY 

KAilTHCMYM<j>HC 

^e^JT6Ae6X^Y'^^^^"CX^lMcoJ^l 

J<:^ltT6MT6<j>JOMlMOl 

^loYMMCDJ'M^^BoY^^iT•xc^^MTr^A^c^Y*^^^*^ 
oYKexxBOMMeeexYTcoMexMOM 

eNToic  Arreipic^Y*^^^^  AiAe<|>j'ONiivioi 
ex^Bo^l6Aeo^sIeMTOICA^^6JOlC 

MeTATCDMAAMTTAAODN^Y*^^^^ 
XJP0IMI2:0NT0CA6T0Y«^Y'^4^«0Y 

eKlYCTAZM^TTACAlKM6KAe6Y-^Oh4 

iviecHCAeNYJ^TocKjXYrHreroMeM 


ANDGNASHINGOFTEETH 

THENSHALLTHEKINGDOMOFHEAVENBELIKENEDUNTO 

TENVIRGINSWHOTOOK 

THEIRLAMPS 

ANDWENTFORTHTOMEETTHEBRIDEGROOM 

ANDBRIDE 

ANDFIVEOFTHEMWEREFOOLISH 

ANDFIVEWEREWISE 

THEYTHATWEREFOOLISHTOOKTHEIRLAMPS 

ANDTOOKNOOILWITHTHEMINTHEIRVESSELS 

BUTTHEWISE 

TOOKOILINTHEIRVESSELS 

WITHTHEIRLAMPS 

WHILETHEBRIDEGROOMTARRIED 

THEYALLSLUMBEREDANDSLEPT 

ANDATMIDNIGHTTHEREWASACRYMADE 


THE  GREEK  TEXT  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT     649 

Hence,  it  was  modified  so  that  the  (ttIxqi  were  separated 
by  points.  From  the  seventh  century  the  custom  began  to 
prevail  to  indicate  the  greater  or  less  textual  division  by 
different  location  of  the  point.  The  KOfx^ia  or  briefest 
division  was  indicated  by  locating  the  (.)  punctum  at  the 
base  of  the  line;  the  kcoXov  (-)  or  middle  division,  by  inter- 
posing it  midway  between  the  base  and  top ;  while  the  full 
period  was  terminated  by  the  punctum  (*)  at  the  top  of  the 
line.  Although  this  was  the  most  ordinary  mode  in  those 
times,  sometimes  the  point  at  the  base  designated  the  full 
period,  and  vice  versa.  Our  modem  mode  of  punctuation 
did  not  come  into  use  till  after  the  invention  of  printing  in. 
the  fifteenth  century. 

The  autographs  of  the  New  Testament  perished  in  the 
first  centuries  of  the  Christian  era.  There  is  almost  a  com- 
plete silence  in  tradition  concerning  any  such  original  writ- 
ings. Some  adduce  a  passage  from  Tertullian  to  prove  that 
the  autographs  were  preserved  in  his  day. 

"Percurre  Ecclesias  Apostolicas,  apud  quas  ipsse  adhuc 
Cathedrae  Apostolorum  suis  locis  praesident,  apud  quas  ipsae 
Authenticae  Literae  eorum  recitantur,  sonantes  vocem,  et 
reprassentantes  faciem  uniuscujusque.  Pi'oxim^  est  tibi 
Achaia,  habes  Corinthum.  Si  non  longe  es  a  Macedonia, 
habes  Philippos,  habes  Thessalonicenses.  Si  potes  in  Asiam 
tendere,  habes  Ephesum.  Si  autem  Italiae  adjaces,  habes 
Romam."     (De  PrcBscriptione  HcBreticorum,   c.    36.) 

Attempts  have  been  made,  indeed,  and  that  by  very 
eminent  writers,  to  reduce  the  term  ''  AuthenticcB  Liter cb''  to 
mean  nothing  more  than  **  genuine,  unadulterated  Epistles, " 
or  even  the  authentic  Greek  as  opposed  to  the  Latin 
translation. 

Others  defend  that  he  evidently  speaks  of  the  autographs. 
But  the  weight  of  evidence  is  clearly  in  favor  of  the  former 
opinion.  Tertullian  was  not  ignorant  that  the  sacred  writers 
did  not  commit  their  thoughts  to  writing  with  their  own 
hands;  and,  therefore,  faithful  copies  of  the  original  docu- 
ments, if  faithfully  executed,  would  be  as  authentic  as  the 


650  ""   THE  GREEK  TEXT  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT 

first  documents.  And  for  this  cause  also,  greater  care  was 
not  bestowed  on  the  autographs,  for  the  faithful  copies  were 
held  in  equal  veneration. 

The  dissemination  of  the  writings  of  the  Apostles  began 
immediately,  b}'-  means  of  manuscript  copies,  and  a  great 
number  of  these  was  soon  spread  abroad  through  the 
churches.  Owing  to  various  causes,  errors  crept  into  the 
copied  texts.  Hence  Origen  complains:  **Even  now, 
through  the  inattention  of  certain  transcribers,  and  the  rash 
temerity  of  those  who  would  amend  the  Scriptures,  and  the 
arbitrary  additions  and  suppressions  of  others,  a  great 
diversity  has  come  into  our  Scriptures."  As  time  went  on 
the  evil  grew.  In  fact,  those  early  Christians,  attending 
mainly  to  the  sense,  w^ere  not  deterred  by  an  excessive 
reverence  from  slight  textual  changes,  which  affected  not 
the  sense.  By  comparative  criticism,  many  of  these  variants 
have  been  brought  to  light.  The  English  critic  Mill  esti- 
mated that  the  discovered  different  readings  of  the  New 
Testament  in  his  day  amounted  to  thirty  thousand;  they 
probably  to-day  are  four  times  that  number.  But  the  great 
mass  of  these  variants  leave  intact  the  substantial  correct- 
ness of  the  sacred  text,  so  that  the  remark  of  Bentley  is  just  : 

"The  real  text  of  the  sacred  writers  does  not  now  (since 
the  originals  have  been  so  long  lost)  lie  in  any  MS  or  edition, 
but  is  dispersed  in  them  all.  'Tis  competently  exact  indeed 
in  the  worst  MS  now  extant ;  nor  is  one  article  of  faith  or 
moral  precept  either  perverted  or  lost  in  them;  choose  as 
awkwardly  as  you  will,  choose  the  worst  by  design,  out  of  the 
whole  lump  of  readings. '  Or  again :  'Make  your  30,000 
[variations]  as  many  more,  if  numbers  of  copies  can  ever 
reach  that  sum:  all  the  better  to  a  knowing  and  serious 
reader,  who  is  thereby  more  richly  furnished  to  select  what 
he  sees  genuine.  But  even  put  them  into  the  hands  of  a 
knave  or  a  fool,  and  yet  with  the  most  sinistrous  and  absurd 
choice,  he  shall  not  extinguish  the  light  of  any  one  chapter, 
nor  so  disguise  Christianity,  but  that  every  feature  of  it  will 
still  be  the  same. "  Thus  God's  Providence  preserved  pure 
the  substance  of  His  written  word. 


THE  GREEK  TEXT  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT     651 

Perhaps  the  gravest  variants  in  the  New  Testament  are 
in  regard  to  Mark  XVI.  9-16,  and  John  VII.  53,  VIII.  11. 

Various  causes  have  conspired  to  bring  the  various  read- 
ings into  the  text  of  holy  Scripture. 

Sometimes  spurious  additions  have  been  made  in  accord- 
ance with  the  copyist's  dogmatic  prepossession. 

Passages  are  interpolated  from  one  writer  into  another 
to  bring  the  text  into  a  fancied  agreement. 

Marginal  notes  have  been  incorporated  into  the  text.  The 
interpolation  of  the  Lord 's  Prayer  as  found  in  King  James ' 
Version  is  an  example  of  this. 

Genuine  clauses  are  lost  by  homoeoteleuton  (ofjLOLOTeXei/- 
Tov),  when  two  clauses  end  in  the  same  word  or  words.  The 
transcriber 's  eye  wanders  from  one  clause  to  the  other,  and 
omits  one,  since  its  ending  is  identical  with  what  immediately 
preceded. 

Such  minor  changes  as  a  change  in  the  order  of  the  words 
are  often  found. 

One  word  is  taken  for  another  from  the  fact  that  it  is  sim- 
ilar, or  one  letter  is  mistaken  for  another,  thereby  changing 
the  sense  of  words. 

Sometimes  the  copyist  has  written  at  another's  dictation, 
and  has  mistaken  the  other's  pronunciation.  This  is  rare 
in  the  better  MSS. 

Sometimes  the  copyists  have  changed  the  New  Testa- 
ment quotations  from  the  Old  Testament  to  bring  them  into 
closer  conformity  with  the  original. 

Synonyms  are  sometimes  employed. 

Readings  have  been  altered  to  avoid  dogmatic  difficulty : 
others  have  been  omitted  for  the  same  reason. 

The  copyist  may  be  tempted  to  forsake  his  proper  func- 
tion for  that  of  a  reviser,  or  critical  collector.  He  may  sim- 
ply omit  what  he  does  not  understand  (e.  g.  to  /jLaprvpiov 
I.  Tim.  II.  6.),  or  may  attempt  to  get  over  a  difficulty  by  in- 
versions and  other  changes.  Thus  the  fjLvartjptov  spoken  of 
by  St.  Paul  I.  Cor.  XV.  51,  which  rightly  stands  in  the  best 
codices  Traz^re?  fjLev  ov  KoifirjOrja-o/JLeOa^  irdve^i  Se  aWayqa-ofieda 
was  easily  varied  into  iravre^  KOLfirjOrja-ofieda^  ov  TraVre?  Be 
aXXayrjcrofieOa^  as  if  in  mere  perplexity. 


652  THE   GREEK   TEXT   OF    THE    NEW   TESTAMENT 

It  is  very  possible  that  some  scattered  readings  cannot 
be  reduced  to  any  of  the  above-named  classes,  but  enough 
has  been  said  to  afford  the  student  some  general  notion  of 
the  nature  and  extent  of  the  subject. 

As  early  as  the  third  century  attempts  were  made  to 
restore  the  text  to  its  original  purity.  It  was  thought  that 
by  critical  collation  of  the  best  manuscripts  and  by  selecting 
the  best  readings,  a  correct  exemplar  might  be  had  as  a  fount 
for  correct  copies.  Hesychius,  an  Egyptian  bishop,  mar- 
tryed  under  Diocletian,  wrought  a  recension  of  the  Greek 
text  of  both  Testaments.  The  text  was  adopted  in  the 
churches  of  Egypt,  and  became  the  basis  of  the  Alexandrine 
family  of  codices.  About  the  same  time,  Lucian,  a  priest  of 
Antioch,  martyred  in  the  same  persecution,  executed  a  recen- 
sion of  the  text  of  both  Testaments,  which  was  received  in 
all  the  Eastern  churches,  from  Constantinople  to  Antioch. 
Of  the  nature  of  the  labors  of  Hesychius  and  Lucian  we  can 
form  no  secure  judgment.  Jerome  accuses  them  of  adding 
to  the  Scriptures  (Ad.  Dam.  Pr^f.  in  Evang.),  and  Gelasius, 
in  the  decree,  "De  recip.  et  non  recip.  libris, "  rejects  **the 
Gospels  which  Hesychius  and  Lucian  falsified. ' ' 

Hug  believes  that  Origen  made  a  recension  of  the  New 
Testament,  but  proof  is  lacking  to  support  the  statement. 

Though  fragments  of  Greek  Scriptures  had  been  printed 
by  Aldus  Manutius  at  Venice  in  1497  and  again  in  1504  the 
first  complete  New  Testament  printed  in  Greek  was  that  of 
the  complutensian  Polyglot  the  munificent  work  of  Ximenes 
(143 7-1 5 1 7)  Cardinal  Archbishop  of  Toledo.  The  New 
Testament  was  published  in  15 14.  The  Old  Testament  was 
finished  about  six  years  later.  The  work  is  estimated  to 
have  cost  £23,000.  The  protocanonical  books  are  printed  in 
Hebrew,  Greek  and  Latin,  the  deuterocanonical  books  and 
the  New  Testament  in  Greek  and  Latin. 

While  Ximenes  was  laboring  on  his  great  work,  Erasmus, 
that  scholarly  vagabond,  hastened  an  edition  of  the  New 
Testament  for  John  Froben  a  publisher  of  Basle.  Froben's 
object  was  to  forestall  the  Spanish  work,  and  the  character 
of  Erasmus'  work  may  be  judged  from  his  declaration  that 
the  volume  "  precipitatum  fuit  verius  quam  editum."     He 


THE   GREEK   TEXT    OF    THE    NEW    TESTAMENT  653 

employed  no  valuable  MSS,  and  sometimes  translated  por- 
tions from  the  Latin  into  Greek  to  supply  lacunas. 
Thus  in  i\cts  ix.  5,  6,  the  words  from  o-KXrjpov  to  Trpo^  avrov 
are  interpolated  from  the  Vulgate,  partly  by  the  help  of  Acts 
xxvi. 

The  result  is  that  the  text  of  Erasmus'  Greek  Testa- 
ment has  no  critical  worth.  And  yet  so  strong  is  prejudice 
that  this  corrupt  text  was  received  by  the  protestants  as 
the  received  text  instead  of  the  far  better  text  of  the  Complu- 
tensian  Polyglot.  This  fact  is  regretted  by  Mill  who 
declares  (Proleg.  p.  iii.  Oxford  1707)  that  it  would  have 
been  far  better  for  all  if  the  Complutensian  were  with  some 
few  corrections  accepted  as  the  received  text.  Delitzsch 
(Handschr.  Funde  I.  p.  5.)  also  declares: 

"Es  wsere  in  der  Gliick  gewesen,  wenn  nicht  der  eras- 
mische  Text,  sondern  der  complutensische  die  Grundlage 
des  spaetern  textus  receptus  geworden  waere. " 

In  1 5 18  appeared  the  Grceca  Bihlia  at  Venice,  from  the 
celebrated  press  of  Aldus,  which  professes  to  be  grounded  on 
a  collation  of  the  most  ancient  copies. 

The  editions  of  Robert  Etienne,  mainly  by  reason  of 
their  exquisite  beauty,  have  exercised  more  influence  than 
those  of  Erasmus;  and  Etienne 's  third  or  folio  edition  of 
1550  is  by  many  regarded  as  the  received  or  standard  text. 

In  the  folio  or  third  edition  of  1550  the  various  readings 
of  the  Codices,  obscurely  referred  to  in  the  preface  to  that  of 
1546,  are  entered  in  the  margin.  This  fine  volume  derives 
much  importance  from  its  being  the  earliest  ever  published 
with  critical  apparatus. 

Robert  Etienne  in  these  editions  first  divided  the  New 
Testament  into  verses. 

The  brothers  Bonaventure  and  Abraham  Elzevir  set  up 
a  printing  press  at  Leyden  which  maintained  its  reputation 
for  elegance  and  correctness  throughout  the  greater  part  of 
the  seventeenth  century. 

Their  undeservedly  popular  Greek  New  Testament  of 
1642  was  considered  the  received  Iq-xX  on  the  Continent.  It 
is  based  on  Erasmus'   corrupt  text.     Robert  Etienne  also 


654  THE   GREEK    TEXT   OF    THE    NEW   TESTAMENT 

took  Erasmus'  text  for  the  standard.  His  edition  was 
the  received  text  in  England. 

In  1657  Brian  Walton  published  his  great  Polyglot,  in 
6  vols,  sometimes  called  the  London  Polyglot. 

In  the  Old  Testament  it  contains  the  Hebrew  text,  the 
Samaritan  text,  the  Chaldean  Paraphrase,  the  Septuagint, 
the  Syriac,  the  Arabic,  and  the  Latin  Vulgate.  The  fifth 
of  his  huge  folios  is  devoted  to  the  New  Testament  in  six 
languages,  viz.  Etienne's  Greek  text  of  1550,  the  Peshitto- 
Syriac,  the  Latin  Vulgate,  the  Ethiopic,  Arabic,  and  (in 
the  Gospels  only)  the  Persian.  None  of  Walton's  texts  are 
of  special  critical  worth. 

It  is  evident  from  what  has  been  written,  that  the  Greek 
text  has  not  been  preserved  to  us  in  all  its  pristine  integrity, 
as  it  came  from  the  inspired  writers'  hands.  But  neither 
has  corruption  so  invaded  it  that  it  should  be  considered  an 
unreliable  fount  of  Scripture.  The  Hebrew,  Greek,  and 
Vulgate  Latin,  remain  three  authentic  founts.  At  times, 
one  is  more  correct  than  another,  and  the  collation  of  all 
three  is  useful  to  the  understanding  of  any  one.  But  it  must 
always  be  considered  that  in  far  greater  part  the  fulness  and 
richness  of  the  sense  can  only  be  received  from  a  perusal  of 
the  original  texts. 

In  the  last  century  arose  what  may  properly  be  called  the 
science  of  Textual  Criticism,  which  may  be  defined  as  a 

METHOD  OF  STUDY  WHEREBY  WE  SEEK  TO  DETERMINE  THE 
CHARACTER,  VALUE,  AND  MUTUAL  RELATION  OF  THE  AUTHOR- 
ITIES  UPON   WHICH   THE   TEXT  OF  THE   HOLY   ScRIPTURES  IS 

BASED.  The  mode  of  procedure  is  to  examine  first  the  age 
of  the  documents,  the  circumstances  of  their  origin,  the 
causes  that  may  have  produced  certain  readings  and  the 
accord  of  one  document  with  another. 

Robert  Etienne  was  the  first  to  collect  and  collate  MSS 
with  the  purpose  of  emending  the  N .  T.  Brian  Walton  ( 1 600 
—61)  in  his  great  Polyglot  employed  the  edition  of  N.  T. 
prepared  by  Etienne  in  1550,  and  added  an  apparatus  criticus 
collected  by  Ussher.  The  first  really  great  work  of  textual 
criticism  is  that  of  Dr.  John  Mill  of  Oxford  which  appeared 
in  1707.     Mill  labored  through  thirty  years  on  his  critical 


THE  GREEK  TEXT  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT     655 

edition  of  the  New  Testament,  and  died  a  fortnight  after  it 
appeared.  Mill's  contribution  to  the  science  of  Biblical 
Criticism  places  him  in  the  first  rank. 

Bentley  (ti742)  believing  that  the  oldest  MSS  of  the 
Greek  original  agreed  almost  exactly  with  Jerome's  Latin 
version,  contemplated  a  critical  text  wherein  the  Greek  of 
the  fourth  century  and  Jerome 's  version  should  be  critically 
compared.  Bentley  was  diverted  to  other  work,  and  died 
without  accomplishing  his  Scriptural  design. 

Bengel  (1687- 1752)  published  a  critical  edition  of  the 
NewTestament  in  1734,  He  collated  sixteen  codices,  but 
so  negligently  that  most  of  them  have  needed  examination 
from  those  who  followed  him.  He  deserves  credit  for  having 
first  contemplated  the  grouping  of  the  codices  into  families 
or  recensions  a  theory  which  was  subsequently  skilfully  de- 
veloped by  Griesbach. 

Bengel  divided  all  codices  into  two  families:  the  Asiatic 
written  chiefly  at  Constantinople,  which  he  inclined  to  dis- 
parage, and  the  African,  fewer  in  number,  but  better  in 
character. 

The  next  step  in  advance  was  made  by  Wetstein  (1693- 
1754)  who  published  a  critical  edition  of  the  New  Testament 
with  a  Prolegomena  prefixed.  He  was  the  first  to  cite  the 
MSS  under  the  notation  by  which  they  are  generally  known. 
The  character  of  the  man  is  revealed  in  his  "Prole- 
gomena." He  was  an  assiduous  student,  audacious,  rebel- 
lious, full  of  contempt  and  hate  for  others ;  a  man-  tinged 
with  Socinian  errors,  arrogantly  intolerant  of  all  men,  while 
demanding  full  liberty  of  thought  for  himself.  The  product 
of  his  impetuous  labors  forms  a  chaos  where  men  may  find 
much  that  is  good  amid  the  mass  of  conjectures. 

Matthaei  (i 744-181 1)  is  more  valuable  as  a  collector 
than  as  a  collator.  While  professor  at  Moscow  he  found 
many  Greek  MSS  both  patristic  and  Biblical  brought 
thither  from  Mt.  Athos.  The  manner  in  which  he  examined 
these  has  been  severely  criticised.  The  justice  of  the  sever- 
ity of  the  criticism  which  Matthaei  encountered  may  be 
judged  from  the  fact  that  he  assigned  to  the  Uncial  Codex 


656  THE    GREEK   TEXT   OF    THE    NEW    TESTAMENT 

50  of  a  Greek  Lectionary  a  value  above  all  the  codices  which 
were  known  in  Europe  in  his  day. 

Hence  it  results  that  Matthaei's  text,  which  of  course  he 
moulded  on  his  own  view^s,  must  be  held  in  slight  esteem: 
his  services  as  a  collator  comprehend  his  whole  claim 
(and  that  no  trifling  one)  to  our  thankful  regard.  To  him 
solely  we  are  indebted  for  Evan.  V.  237-259;  Act.  98-107; 
Paul.  113-124;  Apoc.  47-50;  Evst.  47-57;  Acts  Apost. 
13-20:  nearly  all  at  Moscow:  the  whole  seventy,  together 
with  the  citations  of  Scripture  in  thirty-four  manuscripts  of 
Chrysostom,  being  so  fully  and  accurately  collated,  that  the 
reader  need  not  be  at  a  loss  whether  any  particular  copy 
supports  or  opposes  the  reading  in  the  common  text. 

Matthasi  annexed  the  Latin  Vulgate  to  his  Greek  text, 
as  this  was  the  only  version  which  he  valued. 

Francis  Karl  Alter  (i 749-1804)  a  Jesuit,  professor  at 
Vienna  published  in  1 786-87  a  critical  text  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment. He  accepted  as  his  standard  good  MSS  of  the 
Imperial  library  at  Vienna,  (Evan.  218,  Acts  65,  Paul  57, 
Apoc.  83)  and  collated  with  these  twenty-one  other  MSS  of 
the  same  library  together  with  readings  from  the  Old  Latin, 
Coptic,  and  Slavonic  versions.  The  labors  of  Alter  were  of  a 
very  high  order,  but  religious  prejudice  has  prevented  him 
from  the  recognition  which  is  his  due. 

Birch,  Moldenhawer,  and  T3^chsen  were  sent  into  various 
countries  in  1 783-4  by  Christian  VH.  of  Denmark  to  examine 
MSS.  Moldenhawer  and  Tychsen  visited  Spain,  while  Birch 
traveled  in  Germany.  The  first  result  of  their  combined 
labors  was  an  edition  of  the  Four  Gospels  published  in  1788. 

As  much  of  this  edition  and  the  rest  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment prepared  by  the  collators  were  destroyed  by  fire  in  1 795 . 
Birch  later  collected  and  published  the  fragments. 

Moldenhawer  and  Tychsen  were  so  filled  with  hatred  of 
Spain  and  its  religion  and  so  puffed  up  by  a  vain  arrogance 
that  the  ** Prolegomena"  contributed  under  the  name  of 
Moldenhawer  are  worthless.  Birch  was  more  temperate, 
but  his  examination   of  many    authorities  was  superficial. 

John  James  Griesbach  (i 745-1812)  is  the  next  name 
in  the  history  of  Biblical  textual  criticism.     He  was  intensely 


THE  GREEK  TEXT  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT     657 

hated  by  Matthaei  who  declares  that  though  he  had  never 
''  ut  credibile  est,''  collated  a  MS  even  of  the  tenth  century, 
he  yet  presumes  to  sit  in  judgment  on  those  who  have  col- 
lated seventy. 

Though  Griesbach  did  some  original  collating  of  MSS, 
his  great  work  was  to  select  readings  from  the  great  mass 
collected  by  those  who  had  gone  before  him. 

He  is  famous  for  his  theory  of  families  or  recensions  of 
codices.  At  the  outset  he  was  disposed  to  group  all  extant 
materials  in  five  or  six  families.  He  afterwards  limited  these 
to  three,  the  Alexandrian,  the  Western,  and  the  Byzantine. 
He  assigned  to  the  Alexandrian  family  the  pre-eminence. 
Of  course  Griesbach 's  theory  would  simplify  the  science, 
for  then  one  would  not  need  examine  the  great  mass  of 
codices,  but  only  some  worthy  representatives  of  the  different 
families.  But  for  the  lack  of  evidence  to  support  this  theory 
it  is  now^  quite  generally  abandoned. 

John  Leonard  Hug  (i  765-1846)  merits  a  place  among 
the  Biblical  textual  critics  on  account  of  his  De  Antiquitate 
Cod.  Vat.  Commentatio  published  at  Freiburg  in  18 10. 

Hug  was  a  Catholic,  a  professor  of  Scripture  at  Freiburg. 
He  published  in  1808  an  Einleitung  in  Die  Schriften  Des 
Neuen  Testaments  which  has  great  critical  value. 

It  w^as  Hug  who  first  placed  the  date  of  origin  of  Codex  B 
in  the  fourth  century,  a  judgment  which  has  been  generally 
accepted,  although  Tischendorf  declares  that  he  holds  it 
"non  propter  Hugium  sed  cum  Hugio." 

John  Martin  Augustine  Scholz  (11852)  was  a  pupil  of 
Hug,  and  afterwards  professor  at  Bonn.  He  was  a  Roman 
Catholic.  The  labors  of  Scholz  in  the  cause  of  the  Greek 
text  of  the  New  Testament  were  stupendous.  The  results 
of  his  great  labors  were  embodied  in  an  edition  of  the  Greek 
New  Testament. 

This  work,  which  forms  two  volumes  in  quarto,  has  been 
published  at  Leipsic.  The  first  volume,  containing  the  four 
Gospels,  made  its  appearance  in  1830,  and  the  second,  con- 
taining the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  the  Epistles  of  St.  Paul,  the 
Catholic  Epistles,  and  the  Apocalypse,  in  1836.  The  prole- 
gomena prefixed  to  the  work  consists  of  one  hundred  and 


658  THE   GREEK   TEXT    OF   THE    NEW    TESTAMENT 

seventy-two  pages.  In  it  the  learned  editor  gives  ample 
information  respecting  the  codices,  versions,  Fathers,  and 
councils,  which  he  used  as  authorities,  together  with  a  his- 
tory of  the  text,  and  an  exposition  or  defence  of  his  peculiar 
system  of  classification  of  MSS.  Scholz  spent  twelve  years 
in  preparing  the  materials  for  his  work.  He  visited  the 
libraries  of  the  principal  cities  of  Europe,  and  in  addition  to 
these,  the  libraries  of  the  Greek  monasteries  of  Jerusalem, 
of  St.  Saba,  and  the  Isle  of  Patmos.  He  collated,  either 
entirely  or  in  part,  six  hundred  and  six  manuscripts  not 
previously  collated  by  any  editor  of  the  New  Testament. 
Scholz  refers  all  the  MSS  to  two  recensions  or  families — 
the  Alexandrian  or  African,  and  the  Asiatic  or  Const anti- 
nopolitan — in  other  words,  the  Occidental  (same  as  African), 
and  Oriental. 

In  1 83 1  Karl  Lachmann  (i  793-1851)  published  his 
Novum  Testamentum  Greece  at  Berlin.  In  this  work  Lach- 
mann enters  on  a  new  road  in  textual  criticism.  His  prede- 
cessors had  taken  as  a  point  de  depart  the  texttis  receptus  of 
the  Greek  testament.  Lachmann  recognized  the  well-nigh 
critically  worthless  character  of  this  text,  and  therefore 
directed  his  labors  to  restore  the  ancient  text  from  MSS  and 
the  works  of  the  Fathers.  Lachmann  founded  his  system 
upon  the  principles  of  St.  Jerome  and  those  of  Richard  Bent- 
ley,  who  acknowledged  St.  Jerome  as  a  leader.  In  fact, 
Bentley  had  projected  a  work  entitled  "Proposals  for  Print- 
ing a  New  Edition  of  the  Greek  Testament  and  St.  Heirom  's 
Latin  Version."  The  Anglican  theologians  opposed  Bent- 
ley's  work  on  account  of  the  just  place  it  accorded  St.  Jerome, 
and  this  opposition  prevented  the  execution  of  Bentley 's 
purpose.  Lachmann  entertained  the  same  estimate  of 
Jerome.  He  declares  that  the  "excellent"  and  "very 
reasonable"  principles  of  St.  Jerome  "should  always  be  the 
rule  which  one  should  follow  in  determining  the  reading  of 
the  New  Testament." 

In  1842  Lachmann  pubHshed  the  first  volume  of  his 
Novum  Testamentum  Greece  et  Latine  at  Berlin:  in  1850  the 
second  volume  appeared  at  Berlin.  Lachmann 's  apparatus 
criticus  is  unfortunately  restricted. 


THE   GREEK   TEXT    OF   THE    NEW   TESTAMENT  659 

The  Vatican  Codex,  Codex  of  St.  Ephrem,  the  Codex 
Claromontanus,  the  Amiatinus  of  the  Vulgate,  and  of  course 
the  Sinaitic  were  not  available  to  him.  He  had  the  true 
principles  and  the  true  temper  of  mind  of  a  critic.  His 
work  is  sound  and  just  as  far  as  it  goes.  He  was  the  first  to 
establish  the  principle  that  an  array  of  codices  is  not  an 
array  of  authority.  He  rejected  en  masse  a  great  number  of 
codices,  and  any  unbiased  competent  judge  who  will  ex- 
amine these  must  admit  that  in  this  he  has  done  the  world  a 
service.  The  Vulgate  and  the  Fathers  he  rightly  considers 
as  primary  authorities.  He  was  a  true  scholar  both  in 
spirit   and  in  execution. 

He  restored  the  Latin  versions  to  their  rightful  place  and 
established  the  principle  that  to  ascertain  a  true  reading  one 
must  consider,  not  the  number  of  codices  but  the  character 
of  codices. 

The  next  great  name  in  the  science  of  Biblical  text- 
ual criticism  is  that  of  Tischendorf  (1815-1874).  This 
scholar  declares  that  when  he  set  out  on  his  first  literary 
journey  he  could  not  pay  for  his  coat. 

His  first  labors  were  editions  of  the  New  Testament,  for 
booksellers,  of  no  great  value.  He  traveled  extensively  in 
the  interest  of  scholarship.  He  visited  Italy  twice,  England 
four  times,  and  went  four  times  into  the  East,  where  on  Mt. 
Sinai  he  discovered  the  great  Codex  of  which  an  account 
will  be  given  later.  In  fact  the  fame  of  Tischendorf  rests 
not  so  much  on  his  critical  editions  of  the  New  Testament, 
as  on  the  uncial  codices  which  he  has  published.  His  eighth 
and  last  edition  of  the  Greek  testament  is  the  most  complete 
edition  existing.  His  death  prevented  him  from  adding  the 
"Prolegomena"  to  this  edition.  Speaking  of  his  prede- 
cessors Tischendorf  declares  that  "instead  of  deriving  a 
history  of  the  text  from  documents,  they  had  created  a  his- 
tory of  the  text  in  their  own  minds. ' '  (Tischendorf  N.  T. 
Grasce,  ed.  7.)  It  is  amazing  what  Tischendorf  accom- 
plished during  thirty  years  of  unremitting  toil. 

In  1843  w^s  published  the  New  Testament;  in  1845  "the 
Old  Testament  portion  of  * 'Codex  Ephraemi  Syri  rescriptus" 
(Cod.  C),  2  vols.  4to,  in  uncial  type,  with  elaborate  Prole- 


660  THE    GREEK   TEXT    OF    THE    NEW    TESTAMENT 

gomena,  notes,  and  facsimiles.  In  1846  appeared  '*Monu- 
menta  sacra  inedita,"  4to,  containing  transcripts  of  Codd. 
F^LNW^Ye*  of  the  Gospels,  and  B  of  the  Apocalypse; 
the  plan  and  apparatus  of  this  volume  and  of  nearly  all  that 
follow  are  the  same  as  in  the  Codex  Ephrsemi.  In  1846  he 
also  published  the  Codex  Frederic -Augustanus  in  lithographed 
facsimile  throughout,  containing  the  results  of  his  first  dis- 
covery at  Mount  Sinai:  in  1847  ^^^  Evangelium  Palatinum 
ineditum  of  the  Old  Latin;  in  1850  and  again  in  1854  less 
splendid  but  good  and  useful  editions  of  the  Codex  Amia- 
tinus  of  the  Latin  Vulgate.  His  edition  of  Codex  Clar- 
omontanus  (D  of  St.  Paul),  1852,  was  of  precisely  the 
same  nature  as  his  editions  of  Cod.  Ephraemi,  &c.,  but  his 
book  entitled  *'Anecdota  sacra  et  prof  ana,"  1855  (second 
and  enlarged  edition  in  186 1),  exhibits  a  more  miscellaneous 
character,  comprising  (together  with  other  matter)  tran- 
scripts of  O*  of  the  Gospels,  M  of  St.  Paul ;  a  collation  of  Cod. 
61  of  the  Acts  being  the  only  cursive  copy  he  seems  to  have 
examined;  notices  and  facsimiles  of  Codd.  IFA  tisch.  or 
Evan.  478  of  the  Gospels,  and  of  the  lectionaries  tisch.®'' 
(Evst.  190)  and  tisch.^-*-  (Apost.  71).  Next  was  com- 
menced a  new  series  of  ''Monumenta  sacra  inedita"  (pro- 
jected to  consist  of  nine  volumes),  on  the  same  plan  as  the 
book  of  1846.  Much  of  this  series  is  devoted  to  codices  of 
the  Septuagint  version,  to  which  Tischendorf  paid  great 
attention,  and  whereof  he  published  four  editions  (the  latest 
in  1869)  hardly  worthy  of  him.  Vol.  I.  (1855)  contains 
transcripts  of  Codd.  I,  xerf\  (Evst.  175);  Vol.  II.  (1857)  of 
Codd.  N^RO^  Vol.  III.  (i860)  of  Codd.  QW^  all  of  the 
Gospels;  Vol.  IV.  (1869)  was  given  up  to  the  Septuagint,  as 
Vol.  VII.  would  have  been  to  the  Wolfenbiittel  manuscript 
of  Chrysostom,  of  the  sixth  century ;  but  Cod.  P  of  the  Acts, 
Epistles,  and  Apocalypse  comprises  a  portion  of  Vols.  V. 
(1865)  and  of  VI.  (1869) ;  while  Vol.  VIII.  was  to  have  been 
devoted  to  palimpsest  fragments  of  both  Testaments,  such 
as  we  have  described  amongst  the  uncials :  the  Appendix  or 
Vol.  IX.  (1870)  contains  Cod.  E  of  the  Acts,  etc.  An 
improved  edition  of  his  system  of  Gospel  Harmony 
(Synopsis  Evangelica,i864)  appeared  in  i864,with  some  fresh 


THE  GREEK  TEXT  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT     661 

critical  matter,  a  better  one  in  187 1,  and  the  fifth  in  1884. 
His  achievements  in  regard  to  Codd.  ^  and  B  we  shall 
speak  of  in  their  proper  places.  He  published  his  ''Notitia 
Cod.  Sinaitici"  in  i860,  his  great  edition  of  that  manuscript 
in  1862,  with  full  notes  and  Prolegomena;  smaller  editions  of 
the  New  Testament  only  in  1863  and  1865;  "an  Appendix 
Codd.  celeberrimorum  Sinaitici,  Vaticani,  Alexandrini  with 
facsimiles"  in  1867.  ,  His  marvellous  yet  unsatisfactory  edi- 
tion of  Cod.  Vaticanus,  prepared  under  certain  unavoidable 
disadvantages,  appeared  in  1867;  its  ''Appendix"  (includ- 
ing Cod.  B  of  the  Apocalypse)  in  1869;  his  unhappy  "Re- 
sponsa  ad  calumnias  Romanas"  in  1870.  To  this  long  and 
varied  catalogue  must  yet  be  added  exact  collations  of  Codd. 
EGHKMUX  Gospels,  EGHL  Acts,  FHL  of  St.  Paul,  all 
made  for  his  editions  of  the  New  Testament. 

He  reduces  all  the  codices  to  four  great  families,  i. — 
The  Alexandrian,  used  by  the  Jewish  Christians.  2. — ^The 
Latin  family,  used  by  the  Latin  race,  who,  in  those  days, 
used  Greek  in  liturgy.  3. — The  Asiatic  family,  used  by  the 
Greeks,  both  in  Asia  and  their  own  country.  4. — The  By- 
zantine family,  used  by  the  Churches  of  the  Byzantine 
realm.  He  states  that  there  is  great  affinity  between  the 
Alexandrian  and  Latin  on  one  side,  and  between  the  Asiatic 
and  Byzantine  on  the  other.  He  cautions  all  not  to  put  too 
much  trust  in  the  systems  of  recensions. 

It  is  an  evident  fact  that  the  Scriptural  codices  of  the 
world  bear  such  relation  to  one  another  that  they  have  in 
them  foundation  for  grouping  them  into  certain  families. 
The  very  mode  of  their  origin  demonstrates  this.  But  the 
actual  assigning  of  the  codices  to  their  different  families, 
and  the  determining  of  the  number  of  the  recensions,  is  an 
extremely  difficult  work,  one  that  has  not  been  accomplished. 
Tischendorf  groups  the  codices  in  two  pairs  of  recensions: 
the  Alexandrian  and  Latin  forming  one  pair,  and  the  Asiatic 
and  Byzantine  forming  the  other  pair.  But  he  wisel}^  cau- 
tions that  the  theory  of  these  recensions  is  but  a  theory,  and 
that  it  would  be  rash  to  make  it  the  supreme  norm  in  criti- 
cism. 


662  THE   GREEK   TEXT    OF   THE   NEW    TESTAMENT 

Samuel  Prideaux  Tregelles  (i 813-1875)  merits  a  place 
with  the  foremost  critics.  He  traveled  in  Europe  collecting 
materials    for    several    years. 

In  1857  appeared,  for  the  use  of  subscribers  only,  the 
Gospels  of  SS.  Matthew  and  Mark,  as  the  first  part  of  his 
"Greek  New  Testament"  (pp.  1-2 16);  early  in  1861  the 
second  part,  containing  SS.  Luke  and  John  (pp.  217-488), 
with  but  a  few  pages  of  "Introductory  Notice"  in  each.  In 
that  year,  paralysis,  merctirialium  pestis  virorum,  for  a  while 
suspended  Tregelles'  too  assiduous  labors :  but  he  recovered 
health  sufficient  to  publish  the  Acts  and  Catholic  Epistles 
in  1865,  the  Epistles  of  St.  Paul  down  to  Second  Thess.  in 
1869.  Early  in  1870,  while  in  the  act  of  revising  the  conclud- 
ing chapters  of  the  Apocalypse,  he  was  visited  by  a  second 
and  very  severe  stroke  of  his  fell  disease.  The  remaining 
portion  of  the  Pauline  Epistles  was  sent  out  in  1870  as  he  had 
himself  prepared  it ;  the  Apocalypse  without  the  Prolegomena 
in  1872,  as  well  as  the  state  of  Tregelles'  papers  would  enable 
his  friends  S.  J.  B.  Bloxsidge  and  B.  W.  Newton  to  perform 
their  ofhce.  The  stricken  author  could  contribute  nothing 
save  a  message  to  his  subscribers,  full  of  devout  thankful- 
ness and  calm  reliance  on  the  Divine  wisdom.  The  text  of 
the  Apocalypse  differs  from  that  which  he  arranged  in  1844 
in  about  229  places. 

Except  Codd.  OS,  which  were  published  in  1861  (see 
under  those  MSS) ,  this  critic  has  not  edited  in  full  the  text 
of  any  document,  but  his  renewed  collations  of  manuscripts 
are  very  Extensive:  vi^.  Codd.  EGHKMN'RUXZPA  i,  33, 
69  of  the  Gospels;  HL  13,  31,  61  of  the  Acts;  DFL  i,  17,  37 
of  St.  Paul,  I,  14  of  the  Apocalypse,  Am.  of  the  Vulgate. 

Tregelles  is  a  most  accurate  collator;  he  followed  the 
excellent  principles  of  Lachmann,  and  his  opinions  are  sound 
and  useful.  He  gave  no  importance  to  the  received  text, 
neither  to  the  great  mass  of  the  cursive  MSS.  He  acted  on 
the  principle  that  only  the  ancient  authorities  have  a  voice 
in  determining  the  text.  In  1879  Dr.  Hort  published  an 
appendix  to  Tregelles '  New  Testament  in  which  he  collected 
the    Prolegomena  left  by  Tregelles. 


THE    UNCIAL    CODICES  663 

In  1 88 1  Westcott  and  Hort  published  "The  New  Testa- 
ment in  the  original  Greek  "  at  Cambridge  and  London.  In 
the  same  year  Hort  published  an  "Introduction"  and 
"Appendix"  to  the  same.  The  Greek  Testament  of  West- 
cott and  Hort  was  the  result  of  twenty-five  years'  labor. 
They  depart  more  from  the  textus  receptus  than  any  previous 
editor  had  done,  and  the  best  authority  is  adduced  to  justify 
most  of  their  different  readings.  As  they  had  the  labors  of 
all  those  who  preceded  to  draw  from,  their  Testament  is  the 
most  correct  Greek  Testament  yet  published.  The  excel- 
lence of  the  Revised  Edition  of  Oxford  is  due  to  the  fact 
that  the  revisers  followed  the  same  principles. 

CHAPTER  XVIII. 
The  Uncial  Codices. 

Greek  characters  naturally  divide  themselves  into  "maj- 
uscules '  '.and  "  minuscules. ' '  The  former  class  is  subdivided 
into  capitals  proper,  square  in  form,  suited  for  lapidary 
inscriptions;  and  modified  capitals  somewhat  rounded 
which  we  call  uncials.  The  minuscules  are  employed  in  the 
cursive  MSS.  The  term  "uncial"  may  be  derived  from 
uncia  an  inch  referring  to  the  size  of  the  letter.  In  uncial 
MSS  the  letters  are  not  joined,  and  marks  of  punc- 
tuation are  very  few.  In  general  no  greater  space 
separates  word  from  word  than  separates  letter  from 
letter.  Uncial  letters  prevailed  up  to  the  tenth  century, 
and  some  specimens  are  found  in  liturgical  books  in  the 
eleventh  century.  The  cursive  mode  of  writing  began  in 
the  ninth  century,  and  continued  until  the  invention  of 
printing. 

It  is  conventional  among  scholars  to  designate  the  uncial 
codices  of  Scripture  by  the  Roman  and  Greek  capital  letters. 
One  is  designated  by  the  Hebrew.  The  cursives  are  gen- 
erally designated  by  Arabic  numbers. 

According  to  Scholz's  enumeration,  the  whole  number 
of  codices  of  the  New  Testament,  which  had  been  wholly  or 
partially  collated  up  to  his  time,  amounted  to  six  hundred 
and  seventy-four.  The  whole  number  known  up  to  the 
present  day  would  exceed  two  thousand.     Many  have  not 


664  THE    UNCIAL    CODICES 

yet  been  examined.  Only  a  small  number  of  these  contain 
all  the  books.  Some  exist  only  in  scattered  fragments; 
others  contain  some  particular  book,  or  class  of  books. 
About  one  hundred  are  written  in  uncial  characters,  and  are 
older  than  the  tenth  century.  Of  these,  only  the  Codex  of 
Sinai  contains  the  complete  New  Testament.  The  others 
are  written  in  small  letters,  and  are  of  date  more  recent  than 
the  tenth  century.  About  three  hundred  of  these  contain 
all  the  books.  The  uncial  codices  receive  their  name  either 
from  the  place  where  they  are  preserved,  or  from  the  person 
to  whom  they  have  belonged.  In  classifying  the  codices  of 
the  New  Testament  the  Testament  is  divided  into  the  Gos- 
pels, The  Acts,  The  Pauhne  Epistles,  The  Catholic  Epistles, 
and  The  Apocalypse.  Some  codices  originally  contained 
the  whole  Bible,  some  the  whole  New  Testament,  others 
some  section  or  sections  of  the  New  Testament.  Thus  Codex 
D  of  the  Gospels  and  Acts  is  Beza  's  Codex  in  the  University 
Library  of  Cambridge;  Codex  D  of  the  Pauline  Epistles 
is  the  Codex  Claromontanus  107  of  the  Royal  library  of  Paris. 

In  the  collation  of  MSS  the  editors  have  indicated  the 
various  corrections  which  have  been  written  in  the  codex 
by  later  hands.  A  correction  by  the  original  copyist  is  called 
the  reading  prima  manu.  The  corrections  are  sometimes, 
indicated  by  asterisks  thus  C*  would  be  the  Codex  of  St. 
Ephrem  as  corrected  by  the  first  hand ;  C**  as  corrected  by 
the  second  corrector ;  a  third  corrector  is  indicated  by  three 
asterisks.  Other  collators  use  the  Arabic  numbers  in  the 
same  manner :  Tischendorf  sometimes  uses  the  small  capital 
letters  as  exponents. 

Codex  Vaticanus  B  is  perhaps  the  oldest  and  certainly 
the  most  valuable  codex  of  Scripture,  Its  early  history  is 
not  known.  It  seems  to  have  been  brought  into  the  Vati- 
can library  by  Pope  Nicholas  V.  in  the  fifteenth  century. 
It  was  taken  to  Paris  by  Napoleon  I.,  where  it  was  partially 
examined  by  Hug.  It  was  afterwards  restored  to  the  Vati- 
can where  it  has  since  been  jealously  preserved. 

It  is  a  quarto  volume,  arranged  in  quires  of  five  sheets  of 
ten  leaves  each,  like  Codex  Marchalianus  of  the  Prophets 
written  in  the  sixth  or  seventh  century  and  Cod.  Rossan- 


THE    UNCIAL    CODICES  665 

ensis  of  the  Gospels  to  be  described  hereafter,  not  of  four  or 
three  sheets  as  Cod.  {<,  the  ancient,  perhaps  the  original 
numbering  of  the  quires  being  often  found  in  the  margin. 
The  New  Testament  fills  142  out  of  its  759  thin  and  delicate 
vellum  leaves,  said  to  be  made  of  the  skins  of  antelopes :  it  is 
bound  in  red  morocco,  being  ten  and  one-half  inches  high, 
ten  broad,  four  and  one-half  thick.  It  once  contained  the 
whole  Bible  in  Greek,  the  Old  Testament  of  the  Septuagint 
version  (a  tolerably  fair  representation  of  which  was  exhibited 
in  the  Roman  edition  as  early  as  1587),  except  the  books  of 
the  Maccabees  and  the  Prayer  of  Manasses.  The  first  forty- 
six  chapters  of  Genesis  (the  manuscript  begins  at  iroXcv, 
Gen.  XLVI.  28)  and  Psalms  CV— CXXXVII,  also  the  books 
of  the  Maccabees,  are  wanting.  The  New  Testament  is 
complete  down  to  Heb.  IX.  14  Ka6a:  the  rest  of  the  Epistle 
to  the  Hebrews  and  the  Apocalypse,  being  written  in  by  a 
later  hand. 

In  1533  Sepulveda  writing  to  Erasmus  declared  of  the 
Codex  Vaticanus  that  it  is  most  carefully  written  and  agrees 
in  great  part  with  the  Latin  Vulgate  against  the  received 
Greek  text,  and  to  support  his  statements  he  furnished 
Erasmus  with  365  readings.  In  1669  Bartolocci  the  Lib- 
rarian of  the  Vatican  made  a  collation  of  the  MSS,  but  it  was 
never  published.  Scholz  and  Tischendorf  have  used  his 
collation.  Bentley  made  an  imperfect  collation  of  it  through 
Mico.  Birch  examined  it  superficially  about  1780.  Hug 
examined  it  in  18 10  and  published  the  result  of  his  incom- 
plete examination  under  the  title,  "De  Antiquitate  Cod. 
Vat.  Commentatio, "  He  was  the  first  to  assign  its  date  as 
the  fourth  century,  a  judgment  generally  accepted.  In  1 843 
Tischendorf  obtained  the  privilege  of  examining  it 
for  two  days,  three  hours  each  day.  In  1844  Edward  de 
Muralt  examined  the  Codex  Vat.  nine  hours  a  day  for  three 
days.  He  published  the  result  of  his  labors  in  an  edition  of 
the  New  Testament  in  1846.  Tregelles  saw  the  MS  in 
1845,  but  was  not  allowed  to  transcribe  any  of  its  readings. 

The  care  which  the  Vatican  authorities  bestowed  on  this 
great  codex  is  just  and  reasonable.  It  is  one  of  the  greatest 
treasures  on  earth.     To  men  having  any  just  right  to  see  it, 


666  THE    UNCIAL    CODICES 

the  Vatican  authorities  accorded  every  just  and  reasonable 
right.  One  of  the  tendencies  of  protestantism  was  to  depre- 
ciate the  Latin  text,  and  extol  the  Greek  text ;  and  precisely 
the  so-called  textus  receptus  which  has  been  proven  to  be  of 
little  worth.  They  were  anxious  to  be  the  first  to  collate 
the  greatest  Greek  codex,  and  as  this  was  not  granted  them, 
they  manifest  their  spleen.  The  Vatican  authorities  con- 
templated publishing  this  codex  in  a  worthy  manner;  and 
they  have  accomplished  this  through  the  great  Cardinal 
Mai,  and  Charles  Vercellone.  This  edition  appeared  in 
1857  three  years  after  Cardinal  Mai's  death.  It  is  in  five 
volumes ;  the  fifth  contains  a  preface  by  Vercellone.  Even 
the  great  fame  of  Mai  did  not  save  him  from  the  calumny  of 
those  who  have  always  invoked  the  aid  of  falsehood  in 
attacking  the  Catholic  Church.  While  no  human  work  is 
absolutely  perfect,  the  true  estimate  of  Cardinal  Mai's 
work  will  place  it  above  any  other  codex  of  Scripture  thus 
far  collated.  This  is  to  be  expected.  The  great  learning 
and  sound  judgment  of  the  man,  the  unlimited  resources  at 
his  command,  the  length  of  time  expended,  from  1823  to 
1854,  all  persuade  of  the  excellence  of  the  work.  It  is  urged 
against  him  that  he  has  taken  certain  liberties  with  the  codex. 
One  can  judge  of  the  animus  of  such  an  objection,  when  we 
find  the  great  critic  blamed  for  having  supplied  from  other 
sources  portions  omitted  in  the  Vatican  manuscript,  although 
the  fact  is  duly  notified.  Again  he  is  blamed  for  having 
selected  what  in  his  judgment  was  the  more  probable  of 
the  readings  of  the  first  and  second  hands. 

The  Pharisees  who  impugned  the  known  truth  find  real 
successors  in  these  envious  hypocrites  whose  name  is  legion. 

In  1867  Tischendorf  published  an  edition  of  the  Vatican 
Codex  under  the  title:  "Novum  Test.  Vat.  post  Angeli 
Mai  aliorumque  imperfectos  labores  ex  ipso  codice  edidit 
Ae.  F.  C.  Tischendorf."  In  his  Prolegomena,  p  143  he  con- 
fesses that  he  had  the  Codex  on  two  occasions  for  six  hours 
in  his  hands.  It  is  clear  that  such  rapid  collation  could  be 
of  but  little  avail.  The  fact  is  that  Tischendorf  has  em- 
ployed the  labors  of  others,  and  claimed  them  for  himself. 
He  was  most  intolerant  of  all  rivals,  and  unfair  in  his  judg- 


THE    UNCIAL    CODICES  667 

ment  concerning  them.  And  yet  Tischendorf 's  edition  is 
by  Scrivener  preferred  to  the  great  work  of  Mai. 

Another  great  edition  of  the  Vatican  Codex  has  been 
published  by  Vercellone  and  Cozza.  The  first  volume 
containing  the  New  Testament  appeared  in  1868.  Vercel- 
lone died  in  1869.  The  work  was  carried  on  by  Cozza  and 
Sergius  and  completed  in  1881.  Another  splendid  edition 
appeared  in  1 889-1 890  under  the  care  of  the  Abbot  Cozza- 
Luzi  in  which  the  original  text  is  reproduced  by  photography. 
The  envious  Tischendorf  continued  to  calumniate  the  labors 
of  these  great  scholars  in  terms  so  injurious  and  false  that 
even  Scrivener  cannot  praise  his  pamphlet.  On  the  con- 
trary when  Tischendorf  published  the  Sinaitic  Codex 
Fabian  who  had  taken  Sergius'  place  in  editing  Codex  B, 
hails  Tischendorf 's  discovery  with  unfeigned  absence  of  all 
jealousy,  ''Quorum  tale  est  demum  par,  ut  potius  liber 
Vaticanus  gaudere  debeat  quod  tam  sui  similem  invenerit 
fratrem  quam  expavescere  quod  aemulum"  (Praef.  p.  VIII.). 

All  men  must  feel  grateful  to  the  Vatican  authorities 
for  giving  to  the  world  such  editions  of  the  greatest  Codex 
of  Scripture.  A  specimen  page  of  the  Vat.  Codex  is  shown 
on  page  668. 

The  second  in  importance  of  the  great  Codices  is  undoubt- 
edly the  Codex  Sinaiticus  ^  of  Tischendorf. 

The  history  of  this  great  Codex  is  related  by  its  discoverer 
in  his  preface  to  his  great  edition  of  1863: 

"  Through  the  particular  favor  of  Frederic  Augustus,  the 
excellent  King  of  Saxony,  I  spent  most  of  the  year  of  1844  in 
exploring  the  countries  of  the  Orient ;  chiefly  those  in  which 
the  old  monasteries  exist. 

It  is  well  known  that  this  Oriental  journey  has  become 
famous  through  some  Greek  fragments  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment which  I  sent  to  my  native  country,  dedicated  to  my 
royal  and  noble  patron  as  a  pledge  of  love  and  fidelity. 
They  were  deposited  in  the  library  of  Leipzig,  and  shortly 
afterwards  published. 

I  discovered  these  fragments  of  a  very  old  Codex  of  the 
Septuagint  in  the  month  of  May,  1844.  While  investigating 
old  books  in  St.   Catherine's  Monastery  on  Mt.   Sinai,   I 


668 


THE   UNCIAL   CODICES 


^1? 


Am€m xr. X  A  n  ro cxbisieM 
n  A^M^--r*«^i^TT6yereMc 
•iro  '^^^/XCJD  p  c  WpnSy  e  re' 
K{  eTo  6  ")ri^^  ^  ^:j  Q  re  rotviJ" 

:zcjph  HMrro<n>cucv>cAixo 

^T"0 XM ® f  <X> no Oj^flG  C TXA 

M  <£  M  ojQ  n  ^  p  x  ey  o  M  o  x/f  #<' 
AyTiJb  VijL^KM  H  c  6y -roc 
jVXe  eWe  re  M  X  p  nry  r  i  a>i 
y  M  >wM  X  p  T;:y  r  Honnep  t^ 

cnrGy  ceo  c  i^N  a  r  xy  Toy 

XAXIMA.M  xPT^yr^H  Chfric^ 
•:zei  n/<Ni~i  x/5LNieru!>noN 

>5' X  i^o  K  o  c  M  p  c  zs  I  >^  y -r  6  y 

ily  7170  ^JpyK€r^^J<a!>elC, 

^nrxiJV»x>iAje€  M  kXioii'aj 

01  Ay  T"o  Ni  p  y  n  i^v  p  e /v  x  s  o 

c  /kcb  NT  €  #M  X  Y  'no  I  0€  Toy 
cr  I'xM  -re  KM^e  y  re'w  e'ceAi 
T-oico  rcTne^yoyciiMeic 
^0,6  HOM>»-^YToy  6167, 
Ke  "5  A^  i-« jKHTcuKi oyx^^  K 
e  e  A  H  M  x-TTocc  A  p  KTo  c 


<Twrt'^»f^*r*~" 


THE    UNCIAL    CODICES  669 

chanced  upon  a  basket,  containing  remnants  of  various  torn 
and  destroyed  codices.  Many  of  these  fragments  had 
already  found  their  way  to  the  fireplace.  As  these  frag- 
ments were  considered  worthless  and  were  about  to  be 
destroyed,  I  easily  obtained  possession  of  them.  I  was 
refused,  however,  other  larger  parts  of  the  same  Codex, 
which  were  rescued  from  the  same  neglect,  and  in  which  the 
whole  of  Isaiah  and  the  Books  of  the  Maccabees  were  written. 
I  exhorted  that  these  portions  should  be  preserved  with 
greater  care,  hoping  to  afterw-ards  agree  upon  the  terms  of 
their  surrender  to  me. 

Being  disappointed,  contrary  to  my  expectation,  in  such 
negotiation,  I  determined,  in  my  second  journey  to  the  East 
in  1853,  to  accurately  transcribe  all  that  remained  of  the 
aforesaid  Codex  for  a  future  edition. 

But  when  I  visited  Sinai's  Mount  and  St.  Catherine's 
Monastery  the  second  time,  I  neither  saw  the  treasure  which 
I  sought  nor  learned  whither  it  had  gone.  I  concluded 
from  this  that  it  had  been  carried  to  Europe,  and  that  there 
was  no  hope  left  of  my  possessing  it.  In  1855  when  I  pub- 
lished the  first  volume  of  my  Monumenta  Sacra,  I  edited 
therewith  the  last  page  of  the  text  of  Isaiah  (which  I  had 
already  transcribed  in  1844),  and  I  made  known  that  this 
Codex  Frederico-Augustanus,  and  also  the  remaining  frag- 
ments of  the  same  ancient  book,  wheresoever  found,  had 
been  saved  by  me  from  destruction . 

Having  maturely  thought  of  the  project,  toward  the  close 
of  1856,  with  the  consent  of  Paul  of  Falkenstein,  one  of  the 
chief  ministers  of  the  King  of  Saxony,  I  delivered  letters  to 
the  Russian  Legate  at  Dresden,  asking  for  the  authority  of 
the  Emperor  Alexander  II.  to  set  out  for  the  East  to  investi- 
gate and  acquire  possession  of  old  codices,  both  Greek  and 
Oriental,  chiefly  those  of  the  Sacred  Books.  .  .  .  The 
most  renowned  Emperor,  a  man  indeed  upright  and  good, 
in  the  middle  of  September  1858,  bade  me  execute  my 
proposal. 

But  at  this  time  my  seventh  edition  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment claimed  my  attention.  This  edition  was  finished  at 
the  close  of  1858,  and  in  the  beginning  of  1859,  I  started  on 


670  THE   UNCIAL    CODICES 

my  journey  to  the  East.  I  made  my  third  visit  to  the  mon- 
astery of  St.  Catherine  on  the  last  day  of  January,  and  was 
most  kindly  welcomed  by  the  brothers. 

The  venerable  bishop  expressed  a  wish  that  by  my 
studies,  I  might  find  new  proofs  for  the  divine  truths. 

I  had  already  sent  one  of  the  servants  to  procure  camels, 
intending  to  set  out  for  Egypt  on  the  7th  of  February,  when, 
on  the  4th  of  the  same  month,  I  was  walking  with  the  eco- 
nome  of  the  monastery,  and  conversing  of  the  Septuagint. 
I  had  brought  to  the  monks  several  copies  of  my  edition  of 
this,  and  some  copies  of  my  New  Testament. 

On  returning  from  the  walk,  we  entered  the  econome's 
room.  Thereupon  he  said  he  had  a  copy  of  the  Septuagint, 
and  he  placed  it  before  me,  wrapped  in  a  cloth.  I  opened 
the  cloth  and  saw  something  beyond  my  hopes.  For  there 
before  me,  I  saw  very  numerous  fragments  of  the  Codex 
which  I  had  long  declared  to  be  the  most  ancient  of  the 
Greek  codices  extant  in  parchment.  Among  these  frag- 
ments I  perceived,  still  in  preservation,  not  only  many  books 
of  the  Old  Testament  (including  those  taken  from  the  waste 
basket  in  1844),  but  also,  which  was  by  far  the  most  valua- 
ble, the  whole  New  Testament  in  perfect  condition,  and 
augmented  by  the  entire  Epistle  of  Barnabas,  to  which  was 
added  the  first  part  of  Pastor.  I  could  not  disguise  the 
astonishment  wrought  by  such  a  discovery.  With  the  con- 
sent of  the  steward,  I  transferred  to  my  room  the  book,  or 
rather  the  fragments  of  the  book ;  for  each  leaf  was  rent  into 
many  parts  and  was  covered  only  by  the  cloth.  The  stew- 
ard himself  had  taken  the  fragments  from  the  cell  of  the 
(TK€vo(j)vXa^,  which  contained  written  and  printed  books,  the 
greater  part  liturgical  with  varied  liturgical  apparatus.  He 
had  collected  all  the  extant  fragments  of  the  Codex  shortly 
after  my  first  Eastern  journey.  I  took  them  all  to  my  room 
and  then  I  fully  realized  how  great  a  treasure  I  held  in  my 
hands,  and  I  praised  and  thanked  God,  the  author  of  so 
great  a  benefit  to  the  Church,  to  letters,  and  to  myself.  I 
spent  the  first  night  in  transcribing  the  Epistle  of  Barnabas, 
for  to  sleep  at  such  a  time  seemed  unlawful,  ''  quippe  dormire 
nefas  videbatur. "     The  day  following  I  arranged  with  the 


THE    UNCIAL    CODICES  671 

monks,  that  if  the  superiors  at  Cairo  should  so  order,  they 
should  send  the  Codex  thither  to  me  to  be  transcribed. 
Setting  out  on  the  appointed  day  with  the  kind  letters  of  the 
monk  Cyril,  the  learned  librarian  of  the  monastery, 
we  reached  Cairo  the  thirteenth  day  of  February,  where, 
through  the  favor  of  Agathangelus,  the  venerable  prior  of 
the  cloister,  the  enterprise  so  prospered,  that,  a  thing  seem- 
ingly incredible,  a  messenger  traversed  the  deserts  of  Arabia 
and  Egypt  twice,  within  nine  days,  and  I  received  from  the 
hands  of  the  Superiors  the  ancient  parchments,  on  the 
twenty-fourth  day  of  the  same  month.  As  had  been  agreed 
upon,  the  transcription  of  the  whole  Codex  was  undertaken 
without  delay,  and  with  the  help  of  two  natives,  one  a  doc- 
tor of  medicine,  the  other  a  pharmacist,  it  was  finished 
within  two  months. 

Although  I  revised,  letter  by  letter  the  work  of  my  asso- 
ciates, and  also  that  which  I  transcribed  with  my  own  hand, 
I  plainly  perceived  that  the  method  of  the  old  correctors  was 
greatly  defective,  and  that  the  Codex  needed  a  revision,  in 
order  that  I  might  confidently  undertake  an  accurate  edition 
of  it. 

In  the  meantime,  I  proposed  to  the  venerable  brethren 
of  Sinai  that  they  should  send  the  Codex  through  me,  as  a 
pledge  of  their  special  affection  to  Alexander  II.,  the  orna- 
ment and  defender  of  the  orthodox  faith.  They  heartily 
approved  of  my  proposition. 

But  now  Const antius,  the  Archbishop,  who  had  formerly 
been  patriarch,  died.  The  administrator  of  the  college  in 
the  interim,  an  eminent  man,  had,  by  unanimous  vote,  been 
chosen  to  succeed  the  deceased  prelate,  but  had  not  yet  been 
consecrated.  At  this  juncture  a  certain  one,  who  arrogated 
to  himself  authority,  opposed  me,  but  the  venerable  college 
conceded  what  I  greatly  urged,  that  I  might  bring  the  Codex 
to  St.  Petersburg  to  prepare  from  it  a  correct  edition.  It 
was  only  loaned  me  for  a  time,  till  the  Archbishop  should 
ratify  in  the  name  of  the  college  its  perpetual  transfer.  On 
this  condition  the  Codex  was  delivered  to  me  at  Cairo,  on 
the  28th  of  September,  1859. " 


672  THE   UNCIAL    CODICES 

Tischendorf  arrived  in  St.  Petersburg  in  November, 
where  he  was  received  with  great  respect  by  the  Emperor. 
The  Codex  was  exposed  to  public  view  in  the  Imperial  library 
for  two  weeks.  By  the  aid  of  the  Emperor,  type  was  cast  by 
which  the  great  Codex  was  faithfully  reproduced.  The 
labor  expended  on  this  edition  can  scarcely  be  realized.  In 
1 86 1  the  great  work  was  accomplished,  and  on  the  nth  of 
September  of  that  year  the  splendid  edition  was  presented  to 
the  Emperor.  In  1863,  Tischendorf  published  an  edition  of 
the  New  Testament  for  popular  use,  in  which  he  has  repro- 
duced the  exact  form  of  the  original  Codex  in  modem  Greek 
characters. 

The  Codex  Sinaiticus,  as  we  learn  from  Tischendorf 's 
Notiiia,  consists  of  345  3^  leaves  of  beautiful  vellum,  of  which 
199  contain  portions  of  the  Septuagint  version.  1473^  leaves 
contain  the  whole  New  Testament,  Barnabas'  Epistle,  and 
portions  of  Hermas'  Shepherd.  Each  page  comprises  four 
columns,  with  forty-eight  lines  in  each  column,  of  contin- 
uous, noble,  simple  uncials.  The  poetical  books  of  the  Old 
Testament  however,  being  written  in  crTi^ot,  admit  of  only 
two  columns  on  a  page.  The  order  of  the  sacred  books  is  re- 
markable, though  not  unprecedented.  St.  Paul's  Epistles 
precede  the  Acts,  and  among  them,  that  to  the  Hebrews 
follows  II.  Thess.,  standing  on  the  same  page  with  it. 
Breathings  and  accents  there  are  none ;  the  apostrophe,  and 
a  single  point  for  punctuation,  are  entirely  absent  for  pages 
together,  yet  occasionally  are  rather  thickly  studded. 

Although  there  are  no  capitals,  the  initial  letter  of  a  line 
which  begins  a  sentence  generally  stands  out  from  the  rank 
of  the  rest.  The  annexed  plates  exhibit  Heb.  XII.  27. — 
XIII.  in  original  characters  reproduced  by  Tischendorf,  and 
in  cursive  characters. 

The  vellum  of  the  manuscript  is  very  thin  and  smooth. 
According  to  Tischendorf  it  was  made  of  the  skins  of  ante- 
lopes or  asses.  The  fleshy  side  of  the  skin,  being  softer,  has 
not  preserved  the  writing  so  plainly  as  the  other  side. 
Every  skin  was  folded  so  as  to  form  eight  pages. 

Many  corrections  of  later  hands  appear  in  the  Codex. 

Historical  data  are  wanting  to  determine  its  age.  From 
internal  evidence  Tischendorf  refers  it  to  the  fourth  century 


THE    UNCIAL    CODICES  673 

and  his  judgment  is  acquiesced  in  by  nearly  all  critics. 
Tischendorf  exalts  its  value  above  that  of  any  other  Codex 
in  the  world,  but  perhaps  the  highest  tribute  compatible 
with  truth  would  be  that  it  ranks  next  in  excellence  to  the 
Vatican  Codex . 

The  Codex  contains  all  the  books  of  the  New  Testament ; 
and  adds  Pastor  and  Barnabas'  Epistle.  The  old  Testament 
is  mutilated  so  that  nearly  all  the  historical  books  are 
wanting . 

The  Codex  is  preserved  in  the  Imperial  Library  at  St. 
Petersburg. 

C.  Codex  Ephraemi,  No.  9,  in  the  Royal  Library  of 
Paris  is  a  most  valuable  palimpsest  containing  portions  of 
the  Septuagint  version  of  the  Old  Testament  on  sixty-four 
leaves,  and  fragments  of  every  part  of  the  New  on  145  leaves, 
amounting  on  the  whole  to  less  than  two-thirds  of  the  vol- 
ume. This  manuscript  seems  to  have  been  brought  from 
the  East  by  Andrew  John  Lascar  (d.  1535,)  a  learned  Greek 
patronized  by  Lorenzo  de'  Medici ;  it  was  brought  into  France 
by  Queen  Catherine  de'  Medici,  and  so  passed  into  the  Royal 
Library  at  Paris.  The  ancient  writing  is  barely  legible, 
having  been  almost  removed  about  the  twelfth  century  to 
receive  some  Greek  works  of  St.  Ephraem,  the  great  Syrian 
Father  (299-378).  A  chemical  preparation  applied  at  the 
instance  of  Fleck  in  1834,  though  it  revived  much  that  was 
before  illegible,  has  defaced  the  vellum  with  stains  of  various 
colors,  from  green  and  blue  to  black  and  brown.  The  older 
writing  was  first  noticed  by  Peter  Allix  nearly  two  centuries 
ago ;  various  readings  extracted  from  it  were  communicated 
by  Boivin  to  Kuster,  who  published  them  (under  the  nota- 
tion of  Paris  9)  in  his  edition  of  Mill's  N.  T.,  1 7 10.  A  com- 
plete collation  of  the  New  Testament  was  first  made  in  17 16 
by  Wetstein. 

Tischendorf  brought  out  an  edition  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment of  Cod.  C  in  1843,  ^^^  "^^e  Old  Testament  in  1845.  In 
Cod.  C.  there  are  no  breathings  or  accents  by  the  first  hand; 
the  punctuation  consists  of  a  single  point  nearly  always  on  a 
level  with  the  preceding  letter.     Correctors  have  occupied 

43  (H.S.) 


674        .  THE   UNCIAL   CODICES 

themselves  with  Cod.  C.  They  are  designated  by  Tis- 
chendorf  as  C*,  C**,  and  C***.  Dr.  Hort  has  the  highest  re- 
gard for  the  first  corrector  who  is  supposed  to  be  of  the 
sixth  century.  The  Codex  itself  is  assigned  to  the  fifth 
century,  and  is  of  great  critical  value. 

See  plate  on  page  676, 

A.  Codex  Alexandrinus  is  in  the  British  Museum, 
where  the  open  volume  of  the  New  Testament  is  publicly 
shown  in  the  Manuscript  room.  It  was  placed  in  that 
Library  on  its  formation  in  1 753,  having  previously  belonged 
to  the  king's  private  collection  from  the  year  1628,  when 
Cyril  Lucar,  sent  this  codex  by  the  English  Ambassador  in 
Turkey,  Sir  Thomas  Roe,  as  a  royal  gift  to  Charles  I.  An 
Arabic  inscription,  several  centuries  old,  at  the  back  of  the 
Table  of  Contents  on  the  first  leaf  of  the  manuscript,  and 
translated  into  Latin  in  another  hand,  which  Mr.  W.  Aldis 
Wright  recognizes  as  Bentley's  (Academy,  April  17,  1875), 
states  that  it  was  written  by  the  hand  of  Thecla  the 
Martyr.  It  is  now  bound  in  four  volumes  of  which 
three  contain  the  Septuagint  almost  entire.  The  fourth  vol- 
ume contains  the  New  Testament  considerably  mutilated. 

This  manuscript  is  in  quarto,  i2|  inches  high  and  loj 
broad,  and  consists  of  773  leaves  (of  which  639  contain  the 
Old  Testament),  each  page  being  divided  into  two  columns 
of  fifty  or  fifty-one  lines  each,  having  about  twenty  letters 
or  upwards  in  a  line.  These  letters  are  written  continuously 
in  uncial  characters,  without  any  space  between  the  words. 

The  punctuation  consists  of  a  point  at  the  end  of  sen- 
tences usually  but  not  always  on  a  level  with  the  top  of  the 
preceding  letter.  The  most  favorable  judgment  can  not 
place  its  date  earlier  than  the  fifth  century.  It  is  careless- 
ly written,  and  far  inferior  in  critical  value  to  B,  $<,  and  C. 

In  1786  Woide,  Assistant  Librarian  of  the  British  Mus- 
eum published  the  New  Testament,  in  folio.  In  1816-28, 
Rev.  Henry  Baber  of  the  British  Museum  published  the 
Old  Testament.  Both  editions  were  published  in  uncial 
type.  The  New  Testament  was  again  published  in  i860  by 
Cowper  in  modem  type.  An  autotype  edition  of  the  whole 
Codex  has  since  been  made  by  Mr.  E.  Maunde  Thomson. 


THE    UNCIAL    CODICES  675 

We  shall  now  enumerate  some  of  the  principal  uncial 
codices  of  the  several  parts  of  the  New  Testament. 

Codex  D  of  the  Gospels  and  Acts,  called  Codex 
Bezje  Gr^co  Latinus  belongs  to  the  University  of  Cam- 
bridge. It  was  presented  to  the  University  in  1581  by 
Theodore  Beza.  The  great  veneration  which  the  aforesaid 
University  cherished  for  Beza  and  his  master  Calvin  appears 
in  the  University's  letter  of  acceptance,  in  which  they 
declare:  ''Know  therefore  that,  the  Holy  Scriptures  alone 
excepted,  there  are  no  writers  in  the  history  of  mankind 
whom  we  prefer  to  the  renowned  John  Calvin  and  thee." 

Beza  says  that  he  obtained  it  from  the  Monastery  of 
St.  Irenseus  at  Lyons  during  the  civil  war  in  1562.  This 
city  was  sacked  in  that  year  by  the  infamous  Des 
Adrets  who  espoused  the  cause  of  the  Huguenots.  It  is 
quite  probable  that  the  no  less  infamous  Beza  obtained  this 
Codex  as  a  share  of  the  plunder. 

Beza  declares  in  his  letter  that,  owing  to  the  great  dis- 
crepancy between  this  Codex  and  the  oldest  authorities,  to 
avoid  giving  offense,  he  judged  it  l^etter  to  preserve  the  Co- 
dex than  to  publish  it. 

It  has  been  collated  by  Young,  (1633),  Ussher  (1657), 
Mill  (1707),  Wetstein  (17 16),  Bentley  (1716),  Dickinson 
(1732),  Kipling  (1793),  and  Scrivener  (1864). 

The  Codex  is  mutilated.  Of  its  original  534  leaves 
only  about  406  remain,  and  some  of  these  are  mutilated ; 
and  several  are  added  by  a  later  hand. 

Codex  Bezae  and  Codex  D.  of  St.  Paul  are  the  earliest 
specimens  of  stichometric  writing. 

Scrivener  assigns  a  date  to  the  original  Latin  text  not 
more  remote  than  the  fifth  century ;  but  he  believes  that  the 
present  Latin  text  is  a  later  correction  of  the  original  Latin. 

He  believes  that  the  Greek  text  is  a  copy  of  an  exemplar 
as  ancient  as  the  third  century. 

Mr.  Rendel  Harris  (A  Study  of  the  Codex  Bezse  1891) 
believes  that  the  Greek  text  is  a  translation  of  a  Latin  Codex 
of  the  second  century.  Of  course  in  the  supposition  its 
critical  worth  is  small.  Sub  judice  lis  est.  It  seems  certain 
however  that  Scrivener  has  overestimated  the  value  of  the 
Codex. 


676 


-  THE    UNCIAL    CODICES 


I-   (^ 


iz 


eve 


« 


XJi 


? 


THE   UNCIAL   CODICES  677 

The  following  judgment  has  been  passed  upon  the  Codex 
by  Westcott  and  Hort :  That  it  is  substantially  a  Western 
text  of  the  second  century,  with  certain  additions  of  the 
fourth  century.  That  notwithstanding  a  vast  number  of  er- 
rors, it  is  valuable  in  the  reconstruction  of  the  original  text. 
And  that  it  gives  a  more  faithful  representation  of  the 
manner  in  which  the  Gospel  and  Acts  were  read  in  the  third 
century,  and,  probably,  in  the  second,  than  any  other  exist- 
ing Greek  Codex. 

E.  Codex  Basiliensis,  of  the  public  library  of  Basle,  is 
of  the  eighth  century.  It  was  given  to  the  Library  by  Cardi- 
nal John  de  Ragusio.  It  contains  the  Four  Gospels,  except 
Luke  III.  4-15;  XXIV.  47-53.  It  has  been  collated  by 
Bengel,  Wetstein,  Tischendorf,  Mliller  and  Tregelles. 

F.  Codex  Boreeli,  now  in  the  puplic  library  at  Utrecht 
once  belonged  to  John  Boreel,  Dutch  Ambassador  at 
the  Court  of  James  I.  It  is  badly  mutilated.  The  best 
collation  of  it  was  made  by  Prof.  Heringa  of  Utrecht,  pub- 
lished in  1843.  Its  date  is  the  ninth  or  tenth  century. 
Wetstein's  collation  of  it  is  sometimes  cited  as  F. 

F*  Codex  Coislin  I.  In  the  Coislin  Library  is  preserved 
a  Greek  Codex  of  the  Septuagint  under  the  above  title.  It 
was  first  published  by  Montfaucon  (Biblioth.  Coislin.  171 5). 

In  the  margin  prima  manu  Wetstein  found  Acts  ix.  24, 
25,  and  so  inserted  this  as  Cod.  F  in  his  list  of  MSS.  of  the 
Acts.  In  1842  Tischendorf  observed  nineteen  other  pas- 
sages of  the  New  Testament,  which  he  published  in  his  Mon- 
umenta  sacra  inedita  (1846,  p.  400,  &c.)  with  a  facsimile. 
The  texts  are  Matt.v.  48 ;  xii.  48 ;  xxvii.  25  :  Luke  i.  42  ;  ii  24 ; 
xxviii.  21 :  John  v.  35  ;  vi.  53,  55  :  Acts  iv.  1,^,  34;  ix.  24,'  25  ; 
X.  13,  15;  xxii.  22:  I  Cor.  vii.  39;  xi.  29:  i  Cor.  iii.  13;  ix. 
xi.  33 :  Gal.  iv.  21,  22  :  Col.  ii.  16,  17 ;  Heb.  x.  26. 

G.  Cod.  Harleian,  5684  ^         These    two     copies     were 

or    WoLFii  A.  ^brought     from    the    East    by 

H.  Cod.  Wolfii  B.  J  Andrew  Erasmus  Seidel,  pur- 
chased by  La  Croze,  and  by  him  presented  to  J.  C.  Wolff,  who 
published  loose  extracts  from  them  both  in  his  'Anecdota 
Grseca"  (vol.  iii.  1723),  and  barbarously  mutilated  them  in 
1 72 1  in  order  to  send  pieces  to  Bentley  among  whose  papers 


678  THE    UNCIAL    CODICES 

in  Trinity  College  Library  (B.  xvii.  20)  Tregelles  found  the 
fragments  in  1845.  (Account  of  the  Printed  Text,  p.  160) 
Subsequently  Cod.  G  came  with  the  rest  of  the  Harleian 
collection  into  the  British  Museum;  Cod.  H,  which  had  long 
been  missing,  was  brought  to  light  in  the  Public  Library  of 
Hamburg,  through  Petersen  the  Librarian,  in  1838.  Codd. 
G,H  have  now  been  thoroughly  collated  both  by  Tischendorf 
and  Tregelles.  Cod.  G  appears  to  be  of  the  tenth,  Cod.  H  of 
of  the  ninth  century. 

Codex  L  Cod.  Tischendorf.  IL  at  St.  Petersburg,  con- 
sists of  palimpsest  fragments  found  by  Tischendorf  in  1853 
'*in  the  dust  of  an  Eastern  library,"  and  published  in  his 
new  series  of  Monumenta  sacra,  Vol.  I.  1855.  On  twenty- 
eight  vellum  leaves  (eight  of  them  on  four  double  leaves), 
Georgian  writing  is  above  the  partially  obliterated  Greek, 
which  is  for  the  most  part  very  hard  to  read.  They  com- 
pose fragments  of  no  less  than  seven  different  manuscripts ; 
the  first  two,  of  the  fifth  century,  the  third  fragment  seems 
of  the  sixth  century,  the  fourth  scarcely  less  ancient.  The 
fifth  fragment,  containing  portions  of  the  Acts  and  St. 
Paul's  Epistles  (L  Cor.  XV.  53;  XVI.  9;  Tit.  I.  1-13;  Acts 
XXVIIL  8-17),  is  perhaps  of  the  sixth  century.  The  sixth 
and  seventh  fragments  are  of  the  seventh  century. 

Cod.  Cyprius  K,  or  No.  63  of  the  Imperial  Library  at 
Paris,  shares  only  with  Codd.  M,  S,  U,  the  advantage  of 
being  a  complete  uncial  copy  of  the  Four  Gospels.  It  was 
brought  into  the  Colbert  Library  from  Cyprus  in  1673.  ^^^ 
inserted  its  readings  from  Simon.  It  was  re-examined  by 
Scholz.  The  independent  collations  of  Tischendorf  and 
Tregelles  have  now  done  all  that  can  be  needed  for  this  copy. 
It  is  an  oblong  4to,  in  compressed  uncials,  of  about  the 
middle  of  the  ninth  century. 

Cod.  Regius  L,  No.  62  in  the  Imperial  Library  at  Paris, 
is  by  far  the  most  remarkable  document  of  its  age  and  class. 
It  contains  the  Four  Gospels,  except  the  following  passages : 
Matth.  IV.  22;  V.  14;  XXVIII.  17-20;  Mark  X.  16-30; 
XV.  2-20;  John  XXI.  15-25.  It  was  written  about  the 
eighth  century.  Wet  stein  collated  Cod.  L  but  loosely. 
Griesbach,  who  set  a  very  high  value  on  it,  studied  it  with 


THE    UNCIAL    CODICES  679 

peculiar  care;  Tischendorf  published  it  in  full  in  his  Monu- 
menta  sacra  inedita,  1836. 

Cod.  Campianus  M,  No.  48  in  the  Imperial  Library  at 
Paris,  contains  the  Four  Gospels  complete  in  a  small  4to 
form,  written  in  very  elegant  and  minute  uncials  of  the  end 
of  the  ninth  century,  with  two  columns  of  twenty-four  lines 
each  on  a  page.     Its  readings  are  very  good. 

Codex  Purpureus  N.  Only  twelve  leaves  of  this  beau- 
tiful copy  remain,  and  its  former  possessor  must  have  di- 
vided them  in  order  to  obtain  a  better  price  from  three  pur- 
chasers than  from  one ;  four  leaves  being  now  in  the  British 
Museum  (Cotton  C.  XV.),  six  in  the  Vatican  (No.  3785),  two 
at  Vienna  (Lambec.  2).  These  latter  two  are  found  at  the 
end  of  a  fragment  of  Genesis  in  a  different  hand. 

Cod.  N^  or  in  Tischendorf 's  edition  I*"  is  a  palimpsest  of 
four  leaves  containing  fragments  of  St.  John's  Gospel.  A 
Syriac  work  had  been  written  over  these,  and  this  again  had 
been  obliterated  to  write  thereon  the  hymns  of  St.  Severus 
in  Syriac.  They  were  brought  from  the  Nitrian  desert  and 
are  now  in  the  British  Museum.  They  have  been  deciphered 
by  Tischendorf  and  Tregelles. 

Several  small  fragments  have  been  designated  by  O. 
The  most  important  are  the  fragment  Luke  XVIII.  11-14, 
examined  by  Wetstein,  and  O  of  Moscow  the  latter  of  the 
ninth  century. 

P.  CoDEX  GuELPHERBYTANUs      A  1       Thcsc    are    two 

Q B.  ;  palimpsests, discov- 
ered by  F.  A.  Knittel,  Archdeacon  of  Wolfenbiittel,  in  the 
Ducal  Library  of  that  city,  which  (together  with  some  frag- 
ments of  Ulphilas'  Gothic  version)  lie  under  the  more  modem 
writings  of  Isidore  of  Seville.  They  have  been  deciphered 
and  published  by  Tischendorf  (1866-69.)  He  assigns  P  to 
the  fifth  century,  and  Q  to  the  sixth. 

The  letter  R  is  employed  to  represent  different  fragments 
by  various  editors,  a  very  inconvenient  practice.  Thus  R  of 
Griesbach  and  Scholz  is  a  fragment  of  one  leaf  containing 
John  I.  38-50  now  at  Tubingen.  Tischendorf  repudiates 
this  leaf  as  a  portion  of  an  Evangelistary  of  the  tenth  cen- 
tury;  and  in  his  New    Testament    of    1849  ^^  employed  R 


680  THE   UNCIAL   CODICES 

to  designate  fourteen  leaves  of  a  palimpsest  of  the  eighth 
century  now  in  the  Library^  at  Naples.  In  1859  ^^  designa- 
ted the  Neapolitan  fragment  by  W'',  and  employed  R  to 
designate  the  Codex  Nitriensis  of  the  British  Museum,  Ad- 
ditional 1 72 1.  This  latter  is  a  palimpsest  of  25  fragments 
containing  about  516  verses  of  St.  Luke.  It  may  be  as  an- 
cient as  the  end  of  the  sixth  century.  It  is  one  of  550  MSS 
brought  to  England  in  1847  from  the  Syrian  Convent  of  St. 
Mary  in  the  Desert  seventy  miles  N.  W.  of  Cairo. 

S.  Codex  Vaticanus  354  contains  the  four  Gospels 
entire,  and  is  among  the  earliest  dated  manuscripts  of  the 
Greek  Testament.  This  is  a  folio  of  234  leaves,  written  in 
large  oblong  or  compressed  uncials :  It  bears  the  date  A.  D. 
949.     In  1866  Tischendorf  collated  it. 

Codex  T,  or  Borgianus  I,  in  the  Propaganda  at  Rome 
contains  thirteen  or  more  quarto  leaves  of  SS.  Luke  and 
John,  A  Sahidic  version  is  parallel  to  the  Greek  text. 
They  are  referred  to  the  fourth  century  by  Giorgi  O.  S.  A., 
who  ably  edited  the  portion  of  St.  John  in  1879.  Tischen- 
dorf places  them  a  century  later.  T^  or  T^°'  are  used  to  indi- 
cate a  few  leaves  of  Luke  and  John  in  Greek  and  Sahidic, 
which  once  belonged  to  Woide.  It  has  been  suspected  that 
they  are  a  part  of  T.  T^  at  St.  Petersburg  contains  six 
leaves  of  St.  John.  The  date  of  its  writing  is  judged  to  be 
not  later  than  the  sixth  century. 

T*'  is  a  fragment  of  about  twenty-one  verses  between 
Matt.  xiv.  19  and  xv.  8,  also  of  the  sixth  century,  and  at  St. 
Petersburg. ' ' 

T*^  is  a  fragment  of  a  Lectionar}^  Greek  and  Sahidic,  found 
by  Tischendorf  in  1866  among  the  Borgian  MSS  at  Rome. 
It  contains  twenty-four  verses,  a  few  verses  from  every 
one  of  the  Gospels. 

T^  is  a  fragment  of  Matthew  (III.  13-16)  taken  from  a 
Lectionary  of  the  sixth  century.     It  is  at  Cambridge. 

Codex  Nanianus  U.  i,  so  called  from  a  former  possessor, 
is  now  in  the  Library  of  St.  Mark,  Venice.  It  contains  the 
four  Gospels  entire,  carefully  written.  Its  date  is  not  before 
the  tenth  century.  Tischendorf  in  1843  ^^^  Tregelles  in 
1846  collated  Cod.  U.     It  is  now  mutilated. 


THE   UNCIAL    CODICES  681 

Codex  Mosquensis  V.  of  the  Holy  Synod,  is  known 
almost  exclusively  from  Matthaei's  Greek  Testament:  he 
states,  no  doubt  most  truly,  that  he  collated  it  "bis  diligen- 
tissime"  and  gives  a  facsimile  of  it,  assigning  it  to  the  eighth 
century. 

Some  scattered  leaves  are  classed  under  W  but  they  are 
not  of  sufficient  importance  to  enter  here. 

Codex  Monacensis  X  in  the  University  Library  at 
Munich  is  a  valuable  folio  manuscript  of  the  end  of  the  ninth, 
or  early  in  the  tenth  century,  containing  the  Four  Gospels 
with  serious  defects. 

Codex  Barberini  Y,  225  at  Rome  (in  the  Library 
founded  by  Cardinal  Barberini  in  the  seventeenth  century) 
contains  on  six  large  leaves  the  137  verses  John  XVL 
3-XIX.  41,  of  about  the  eighth  century.  Tischendorf  ob- 
tained access  to  it  in  1843,  ^^^  published  it  in  his  first  in- 
stalment of  Monumenta  sacra  inedita,  1846. 

Codex  Dublinensis  rescriptus,  Z,  one  of  the  chief 
palimpsests  extant,  contains  290  verses  of  St.  Matthew's 
Gospel  in  twenty-two  fragments.  It  was  discovered  in  1787 
by  Dr.  John  Barrett,  Senior  Fellow  of  Trinity  College,  Dublin, 
under  some  cursive  writing  of  the  tenth  century  or  later,  con- 
sisting of  Chrysostom  de  Sacerdotio,  extracts  from  Epiphan- 
ius,  etc.  In  the  same  volume  are  portions  of  Isaiah  and  of 
Gregory  Nazianzen,  in  erased  uncial  letters,  but  not  so  an- 
cient as  the  fragment  of  St.  Matthew.  All  the  thirty-two 
leaves  of  this  Gospel  that  remain  were  engraved  in  copper- 
plate facsimile  at  the  expense  of  Trinity  College,  and  pub- 
lished by  Barrett  in  1801,  furnished  with  Prolegomena,  and 
the  contents  of  each  facsimile  plate  in  modem  Greek 
characters  on  the  opposite  page.  He  ascribes  the  Codex  to 
the  sixth  century. 

In  1853  Tregelles,  by  subjecting  the  MS  to  a  chemical 
mixture,  deciphered  200  more  letters.  In  1880  Abbot,  of  the 
University  of  Dublin,  published  the  Codex,  with  400  more 
letters  which  he  deciphered.  Abbot  places  its  date  in  the 
fifth  century. 

Codex  Tischendorfian.  IV.  was  brought  by  Tischen- 
dorf from  an  **  eastern  monastery, "   and  was  bought  for  the 


682  THE   UNCIAL   CODICES 

Bodleian  Library  in  1855.     It  consists  of  158  leaves  in  large 
quarto,  of  the  ninth  century. 

Codex  Sangallensis  A  was  first  inspected  by  Gerbert 
(1773),  named  by  Scholz  (N.  T.  1830),  and  made  fully 
known  to  us  by  the  admirable  edition  in  lithographed  fac- 
simile of  every  page,  by  H.  Ch.  M.  Rettig,  published  at  Zurich 
1836,  with  copious  and  satisfactory  Prolegomena.  It  is  pre- 
served and  was  probably  transcribed  in  the  seventh  century 
in  the  great  monastery  of  St.  Gall  in  the  North-east  of 
Switzerland.  It  is  rudely  written  on  197  leaves  of  coarse 
vellum  4to,  in  a  very  peculiar  hand,  with  an  interlinear 
Latin  version.  It  contains  the  four  Gospels  complete  except 
John  XIX.  17-25.  Rettig  thinks  that  Cod.  A  is  part  of 
the  same  book  as  the  Codex  Boemerianus,  G  of  St.  Paul's 
Epistles. 

CoDEX  @  TiscHENDORF  I.  was  brought  from  the  East  by 
Tischendorf  in  1845,  published  by  him  in  his  Monumenta 
sacra  inedit.,  1846,  and  deposited  in  the  University  Library 
at  Leipsic.  It  consists  of  but  four  leaves  (all  imperfect) 
4to,  of  very  thin  vellum,  almost  too  brittle  to  be  touched,  so 
that  each  leaf  is  kept  separately  in  glass.  It  contains  about 
forty  verses;  viz.,  Matth.  XIII.  46-55  (in  mere  shreds); 
and  XIV.  4-14.  Tischendorf  conjectures  it  to  be  of  the 
end  of  the  seventh  century. 

Other  small  fragments  collected  by  Tischendorf  which 
death  prevented  him  from  publishing  are  indicated  as : 

€)^,  six  leaves  in  large  8vo,  of  the  sixth  or  seventh  cen- 
tury, torn  piecemeal  for  binding  and  hard  to  decipher,  con- 
tains Matt.  xxii.  i6-xxiii.  13  ;  Mark  iv.  24-25  ;  v.  14-23. 

Q*',  one  folio  leaf,  of  the  sixth  century,  much  like  Cod.  N, 
contains  Matt.  xxi.  19-24.  Another  leaf  contains  John 
xviii.  29-35. 

@^,  half  a  leaf  in  two  columns,  of  the  seventh  or  eighth 
century,  with  accents  by  a  later  hand,  contains  Luke  xi.  37- 
41;  42-45. 

@®,  containing  fragments  of  Matt.  xxvi.  2-4;  7-9:  <H)^  of 
Matt.  xxvi.  59-70;  xxvii.  44-56;  Mark  i.  34-ii.  12  (not  con- 
tinuously throughout) :  (h)^,  of  John  vi.  13,  14;  22-24;  are  all 
of  about  the  sixth  century. 


THE    UNCIAL    CODICES  683 

0^,  consisting  of  three  leaves,  in  Greek  and  Arabic  of  the 
ninth  or  tenth  centuries,  contains  imperfect  portions  of 
Matt.  xiv.  6-13 ;  xxv.  9-16 ;  41-xxvi. 

A  Codex  Tischendorfian.  III.  whose  history,  so  far 
as  we  know  it,  exactly  resembles  that  of  Cod.  F,  and  like  it  is 
now  in  the  Bodleian  (Auct.  T.  Infra  i.  1).  It  contains  157 
leaves,  of  the  ninth  century.  It  has  the  Gospels  of  St. 
Luke  and  St.  John  complete,  with  the  subscription  to  St. 
Mark. 

Codex  Zacynthius  H  is  a  palimpsest  in  the  Library  of 
the  British  and  Foreign  Bible  Society  in  London,  which, 
under  an  Evangelistarium  written  on  coarse  vellum  of  the 
thirteenth  century,  contains  large  portions  of  St.  Luke, 
down  to  Chap.  XL  33,  in  full  well-formed  uncials,  but  sur- 
rounded by,  and  often  interwoven  with  large  extracts  from 
the  Fathers,  in  a  hand  that  cannot  be  earlier  than  the 
eighth   century. 

n.  CoDEX  Petropolitanus  consists  of  350  vellum 
leaves  in  small  quarto,  and  contains  the  Gospels  complete 
except  Matt.  iii.  12 — iv.  18;  xix.  12 — xx.  3;  John  viii.  6-39; 
seventy-seven  verses.  A  century  since  it  belonged  to  Paro- 
dus,  a  noble  Greek  of  Smyrna,  and  its  last  possessor  was 
persuaded  by  Tischendorf,  in  1859,  to  present  it  to  the 
Emperor  of  Russia.  Tischendorf,  states  that  it  is  of  the  age 
of  the  later  uncials  (meaning  the  ninth  century),  but  of 
higher  critical  importance  than  most  of  them,  and  much 
like  Cod.  K  in  its  rarer  readings. 

2,  Cod.  Rossanensis,  like  Cod.  N  described  above,  is  a 
manuscript  written  on  thin  vellum  leaves  stained  purple, 
in  silver  letters,  the  first  three  lines  of  each  Gospel  being  in 
gold.  Like  Cod.  D  it  probably  dates  from  the  sixth  century, 
if  not  a  little  sooner,  and  is  the  earliest  known  copy  of  Scrip- 
ture which  is  adorned  with  miniatures  in  water  colors, 
seventeen  in  number,  very  interesting  and  in  good  preserva- 
tion. 

T  Codex  Blenheimius,  Brit.  Mus.  Additional  31 919, 
formerly  Blenheim  3.  D.  13,  purchased  from  the  Sunderland 
sale  in  1882.  Professors  T.  K.  Abbott  and  J.  P.  Mahaffy  of 
Trinity  College,  Dublin,  discovered  at  Blenheim  in  May, 


684  THE   UNCIAL   CODICES 

1 88 1,  palimpsest  fragments  of  the  Gospels  of  the  eighth 
century,  being  seventeen  passages  scattered  over  thirty- 
three  of  the  leaves:  viz.  Matt.  i.  1-14;  v.  3-19;  xii.  27-41; 
xxiii.  5 — ^xxv.  30;  43 — ^xxvi.  26;  50 — xxvii.  17;  Mark  i. 
1-42  ;  ii.  21 — V.  I ;  29 — vi.  22  ;  x.  50 — xi.  13  ;  Luke  xvi.  21 — 
xvii.  3;  19-37;  xix.  15-31;  John  ii.  18— iii.  5;  iv.  23-37; 
V.  35 — vi.  2 :  in  all  484  verses.  In  1883,  Dr.  Gregory  discov- 
ered two  more  leaves,  making  thirty-six  in  all. 

<l>.  Codex  Beratinus.  This  symbol  was  taken  by 
Herr  Oscar  von  Gebhardt  to  denote  the  imaginary  parent  of 
Cursives  13,  69,  124,  346,  of  which  the  similarity  has  been 
traced  by  the  late  W.  H.  Ferrar  and  Dr.  T.  K.  Abbott  in  "A 
Collection  of  Four  Important  MSS. "  (1877).  But  it  is  now 
permanently  affixed  to  an  Uncial  MS.  seen  by  M.  Pierre 
Batiffol  on  the  instigation  of  Prof.  Duchesne  in  1875  at 
Berat  or  Belgrade  in  Albania.  It  may  date  back  to  the 
end  of  the  fifth  century. 

A  fragment  in  the  Monastery  of  Laura  at  Mt.  Athos  is 
designated  as  "^ ;  and  another  in  the  Monaster  of  St.  Dionys- 
ius  on  Mt.  Athos  is  cited  by  the  sign  fl.  3  designates  a 
fragment  in  the  Monastery  of  St.  Andrew  on  Mt.  Athos. 

We  shall  only  mention  a  few  of  the  most  valuable  uncials 
of  Acts  and  Paul's  Epistles. 

Codex  Laudianus  E,  35  is  one  of  the  most  precious 
treasures  preserved  in  the  Bodleian  at  Oxford.  It  is  a  Latin- 
Greek  copy,  with  two  columns  on  a  page,  the  Latin  version 
holding  the  post  of  honor  on  the  left.  It  is  written  in  very- 
short  o"Tt%o£,  consisting  of  from  one  to  three  words  each,  the 
Latin  words  always  standing  opposite  to  the  corresponding 
Greek.  The  character  of  the  writing  points  to  the  end  of  the 
sixth  century  as  its  date.  The  Latin  is  not  of  Jerome's  or 
the  Vulgate  version ;  but  is  made  to  correspond  closely  with 
the  Greek,  even  in  its  interpolations  and  rarest  various 
readings.  This  manuscript  contains  only  the  Acts  of  the 
Apostles,  and  exhibits  a  remarkable  modification  of  the  text. 
This  manuscript,  with  many  others,  was  presented  to  the 
University  of  Oxford  in  the  year  1636,  by  its  Chancellor, 
Laud.  Thomas  Heame,  the  celebrated  antiquary,  pub- 
lished a  full  edition  of  it  in  171 5,  which  is  now  very  scarce, 
and  is  known  to  be  far  from  accurate. 


THE    UNCIAL    CODICES  685 

Tischendorf  collated  it  in  1854  and  1865  and  published  it 
in  his  Monumenta  Sacra  hiedita  in  1870. 

Codex  Mutinensis  H,  196,  of  the  Acts,  in  the  Grand 
Ducal  Library  at  Modena,  is  an  uncial  copy  of  about  the 
ninth  century,  defective  in  Act.  I.  i  V.  28;  IX.  39 — X.  19; 
XIII.  36 — XIV.  3  (all  supplied  by  a  recent  hand  of  the  fif- 
teenth century) ;  and  in  XXVII.  4--XXVIII.  31  (supplied  in 
uncials  of  about  the  eleventh  century) .  The  Epistles  are  in 
cursive  letters  of  the  twelfth  century,  indicated  in  the 
Catholic  Epistles  by  h,  in  the  Pauline  by  179.  Scholz  first 
collated  it;  then  Tischendorf  in  1843,  and  Tregelles  in  1846. 

P,  Cod.  Porphyrianus  is  a  palimpsest  containing  the 
Acts,  all  the  Epistles,  the  Apocalypse,  and  a  few  fragments 
of  4  Maccabees,  of  the  ninth  century,  found  by  Tischendorf 
in  1862  at  St.  Petersburg. 

D,  Cod.  Claromontanus,  No.  107  of  the  Royal  Library 
at  Paris,  is  a  Greek-Latin  copy  of  St.  Paul's  Epistles,  one  of 
the  most  ancient  and  important  in  existence.  Like  the  Cod. 
Ephraemi  in  the  same  Library  it  has  been  fortunate  in  such 
an  editor  as  Tischendorf,  who  published  it  in  1852  with 
complete  Prolegomena,  and  a  facsimile  traced  by  Tregelles. 
This  noble  volume  is  in  small  quarto,  written  on  533  leaves 
of  the  thinnest  and  finest  vellum.     See  following  plate. 

Beza  declares  that  he  found  it  at  Clermont  near  Beauvaitr 
hence  its  name.     It's  judged  to  be  of  the  second  half  of  the 
sixth  century. 

Codex  Sangermanensis  E.  is  Greek-Latin  manuscript, 
and  takes  its  name  from  the  Abbey  of  St.  Germain  des 
Pres  near  Paris.  In  1895  Matth^ei  found  this  copy,  at  St. 
Petersburg,  where  it  is  now  deposited.  Wetstein  thor- 
oughly collated  it ;  and  not  only  he  but  Sabatier  and  Gries- 
bach  perceived  that  it  was,  at  least  in  the  Greek,  nothing 
better  than  a  mere  transcript  of  Codex  Claromontanus, 
made  by  some  ignorant  person  about  the  tenth  century. 

Codex  Augiensis  F,  in  the  Library  of  Trinity  College, 
Cambridge  (B,  17.  i),  is  a  Greek-Latin  manuscript  of  the 
ninth  century. 

Codex  Boernerianus  G,  so  called  from  a  former  pos- 
sessor, now  in  the  Royal  Library  at  Dresden. 


686  THE   SEPTUAGINT  AND   ITS   VERSIONS 

Herr  Corssen  believes  that  F  and  G  are  independent  of 
each  other,  and  that  they  are  translations  from  the  Latin. 
The  date  is  uncertain. 

Chapter  XIX. 

The  Septuagint  and  Its  Versions. 

The  Septuagint  is  the  first  authentic  Greek  version  of  the 
Old  Testament.     It  is  called  the  Septuagint  from  the  fact, 
that  it  was  supposed  to  be  the  work  of  seventy  or  seventy- 
two  interpreters.     Of  its  origin  w^e  have  many  accounts  all 
of  them  more  or  less  legendary  in  nature.     Aristseus   gives 
us  the  first  account  of  its  origin.     According  to  him,  Ptolemy 
Philadelphus  in  the  third  century  B.  C,  wishing  to  found  a 
great  library  in  Alexandria,  and  hearing  much  of  the  Jewish 
Law  sent  messengers  to  Eleazar,  the  high  priest,  desiring  a 
copy  of  the  Books  of  the  Jewish  Law  for  his  library.     The 
high  priest,  Eleazar,  choosing  six  interpreters  from  every 
tribe,   sent  the  seventy-two  interpreters  to  translate  the 
books  into  Greek.     These,  after  being  kindly  received  by 
the  King,  betook  themselves  to  the  Isle  of  Pharos,  to  a  great 
hall,  where  for  nine  hours  each  day  they  labored  for  seventy 
or  seventy-two  days,  conferring  with  one  another  in  difficult 
passages.     The  work  was  transcribed  with  care  by  men 
employed  by  Ptolemy,  and  was  pronounced  authentic,  and 
an  anathema  was  pronounced  against  all  who  should  ques- 
tion its  authority.     This  in  brief  is  the  story  of  Aristasus  as 
related  by  Flavius  Josephus,  Antiq.,  Bk.  XII.  II.  passim. 
Philo,  the  Alexandrine  Jew,  has  an  account  much  similar, 
giving  to  the  interpreters  divine  inspiration.     He  does  not, 
however,   mention  Aristseus,   who  according  to  his     own 
story,  had  a  great  part  in  the  translation.     Nor  does  he 
mention  Demetrius  Phalereus  who,  according  to    Aristseus, 
was  the  Librarian  of  Ptolemy.     St.  Justin  the  Martyr  (ti63 
or  167  A.  D.),  has  a  different  version  of  the  origin  of  the 
work.     According  to  him,  the  interpreters  were  sent  to  the 
Isle  of  Pharos  in  separate  cells,  so  all  mutual  communication 
was  cut  off.     There  they  executed  every  one  a  translation 
of  the  Hebrew  text,  which  versions  were  afterwards  found  to 
agree  in  the  most  minute  details,  even  to  the  number  of 


?»>.f.Vt^^ 


,_./rApliMhllc'HTHmpKi   '  ■ 
ill  AO  fi  M  A*"r4Til>M4  I^AFIitD! 

:HTo  k:m  eX  eci  h  ikicu. 

.oyf-J€fqyMe 
A^  ^.  i[-        f  *  <!i,  *■ 


r--",' 


THE    SEPTUAGINT   AND    ITS    VERSIONS  687 

letters.  The  King,  overcome  by  this  miracle,  caused  the 
Jews  to  be  treated  with  great  honors,  and  sent  them  back 
loaded  with  gifts  to  their  own  country. 

St.  Justin  avows  that  he  saw  with  his  own  eyes  the  cells 
of  these  interpreters.  Mention  of  the  seventy  cells  occurs 
also  in  the  works  of  Irenaeus,  Cyril  of  Jerusalem,  John 
Chrysostom,  and  Augustine.  St.  Epiphanius,  who  lived  in 
the  fourth  century  A.  D.,  varies  the  legend  somewhat.  Ac- 
cording to  him,  there  were  but  thirty-six  cells,  and  two  in- 
terpreters in  every  cell. 

Many  of  the  Fathers  of  the  Church  considered  this  ver- 
sion inspired .  Thus  St .  Augustine  says ,  that  when  the  seven- 
ty departed  from  the  Hebrew  text,  they  did  so  at  the  instiga- 
tion of  the  Holy  Ghost.  St.  Jerome  rejecting  the  fable  of 
the  seventy  cells  believed  that  only  the  Pentateuch  was 
made  under  Ptolemy.  Hence,  the  origin  of  the  Septuagint 
is  shrouded  in  obscurity. 

Without  doubt  the  interpreters  from  Judaea  under  Ptol- 
emy translated  at  least  the  Pentateuch ;  and  other  unknown 
authors  at  unknown  dates  added  the  others  at  subsequent 
periods.  The  legend  of  the  seventy  cells  is  critically  absurd, 
and  the  testimony  of  Aristaeus  of  no  worth.  The  varied 
style  of  the  books  of  the  Septuagint  proves  that  they  are  not 
the  work  of  one  translator.  However  legendary  be  these 
accounts,  we  must  recognize  in  the  origin  of  the  Septuagint 
the  special  providence  of  God,  ordaining  that  a  version  of 
the  Holy  Scriptures,  a  complete  version  of  all  the  books, 
should  exist  at  the  advent  of  Christ,  that  the  universal  king- 
dom of  Christ  might  be  the  more  easily  diffused  far  and  wide 
through  the  assistance  of  the  Holy  Writ  existing  in  the  Greek 
tongue,  which  at  that  time  had  become  the  universal  medium 
of  communication  of  thought  in  the  civilized  world.  The 
Septuagint  has  the  highest  approbation,  that  of  the  writers 
of  the  New  Testament,  who  quoted  the  Old  Testament 
chiefly  not  from  the  Hebrew,  but  according  to  the  Greek 
version  of  the  Septuagint. 

The  legendary  origin  of  the  Septuagint  caused  many  of 
the  old  Fathers  to  believe  in  the  inspiration  of  the  seventy 
interpreters.      St.   Jerome    inveighs    forcibly    against   this 


688  THE   SEPTUAGINT  AND    ITS   VERSIONS 

absurdity.  When  the  earlier  Fathers  in  their  controversy 
with  the  Jews  alleged  passages  from  the  Septuagint  against 
them,  the  Jews  responded  that  these  were  not  in  the  Hebrew 
Canon  of  Scripture.  Hence,  the  Fathers,  to  defend  their 
position  invoked  the  inspiration  of  the  Septuagint.  From 
the  Septuagint  was  made  the  first  Latin  translation  called 
the  Vetus  Itala,  and  to  defend  this,  St.  Augustine  asserted 
the  inspiration  of  the  Septuagint. 

**  For  the  same  Spirit  who  was  in  the  Prophets  when  they 
spoke  these  things  was  also  in  the  seventy  men  when  they 
translated  them,  so  that  assuredly  they  could  also  say  some- 
thing else,  just  as  if  the  Prophet  himself  had  said  both, 
because  it  would  be  the  same  Spirit  who  said  both ;  and  they 
could  say  the  same  thing  differently,  so  that,  although  the 
words  were  not  the  same,  yet  the  same  meaning  should  shine 
forth  to  those  of  good  sense ;  and  they  could  omit  or  add 
something,  so  that  even  by  this  it  might  be  shown  that  there 
was  in  that  work  not  human  bondage,  which  the  translator 
owed  to  the  words,  but  rather  divine  power,  which  filled  and 
ruled  the  mind  of  the  translator. "  (S.  Aug.  De  Civit.  Dei, 
XVIII.  43).  And  indeed  a  strong  motive  which  induced  the 
Fathers  to  defend  the  inspiration  of  the  Septuagint  was  the 
need  of  some  explanation  of  the  "variantia"  in  the  texts. 
St.  Augustine's  explanation,  admitting  the  inspiration,  filled 
that  need.  Many  Catholic  waiters  hold  with  St.  Jerome  that 
only  the  Pentateuch  was  translated  by  the  seventy  inter- 
preters, and  the  other  books  added  at  a  later  date. 

S.  Hilary  appeals  for  the  authority  of  the  Septuagint  to 
its  great  antiquity,  and  to  the  fact  that  its  translators  had 
the  oral  tradition  of  the  synagogue.  This  is  the  only  rea- 
sonable motive  for  its  great  value. 

S.  John  Chrysostom  speaks  of  the  great  authority  of  the 
Septuagint,  but  never  hints  at  its  inspiration.  Hence,  we 
conclude  that  the  Church  has  never  recognized  the  inspira- 
tion of  the  Septuagint,  and  the  Fathers  who  defended  it 
were  deceived  by  the  legend  of  Aristseus,  while  the  most 
illustrious  among  them  do  not  insist  on  the  inspiration  of  the 
Septuagint  for  its  great  authority,  but  on  its  great  antiquity. 


THE    SEPTUAGINT   AND    ITS    VERSIONS  689 

The  different  books  of  the  Septuagint  differ  greatly  in 
excellence.  The  Pentateuch  is  pre-eminent  in  accuracy  and 
grace  of  diction.  The  version  of  Proverbs  is  also  excellent. 
The  version  of  Ezekiel  is  the  best  of  the  prophetical  works. 
Job  is  very  imperfectly  rendered ;  many  things  are  omitted, 
and  other  things  plainly  do  not  reproduce  the  sense  of  the 
original.  The  Psalms  and  Ecclesiastes  are  very  defective, 
and  so  poor  was  the  version  of  Daniel,  that  the  Church 
discarded  it,  and  substituted  the  version  of  Theodotion. 

The  Jews  of  Palestine  at  first  held  in  high  esteem  the 
Septuagint,  but  as  the  Christians,  in  the  rise  of  Christianity, 
used  it  effectively  against  them,  they  conceived  a  great 
hatred  against  it.  In  detestation  of  it,  they  compared  the 
day  on  which  it  was  completed  to  the  day  on  which  the 
golden  calf  was  set  up  in  the  desert,  and  decreed  a  fast  to 
take  place  yearly  on  that  day.  (Talmud  Tr.  Sopher,  Meg. 
Thaanith.)  As  this  hatred  was  shared  by  the  Hellenist 
Jews,  who  were  ignorant  of  Hebrew,  they  desired  other 
Greek  versions ;  hence  arose  other  Greek  versions  of  the  Old 
Testament. 

Of  the  post-Christian  versions,  that  of  Aquila  is  the  first 
in  order  of  time,  and  it  is  in  the  closest  agreement  with  the 
letter  of  the  Hebrew  text.  The  traditions  relating  to  'A/ci;Xa9, 
in  Christian  and  Jewish  writings,  are  so  far  in  agreement 
that  they  may  be  assumed  to  refer  to  one  and  the  same 
person.  By  Epiphanius  he  is  described  {De  Mens,  et  Pond. 
§§  13-15)  as  of  vSinope  in  Pontus,  and  as  irevdepLhr^'i  of  the 
Emperor  Hadrian,  in  whose  twelfth  year,  and  430  years 
after  the  LXX.,  he  flourished,  and  by  whom  he  was  com- 
missioned to  superintend  the  rebuilding  of  Jerusalem. 
Seeing  the  faith  and  miracles  of  tlie  disciples  of  the  Apostles, 
he  is  led  .to  embrace  Christianity,  but  still  clings  to  his  faith 
in  the  vain  aarpovo/jiLa,  and  is,  in  consequence,  excom- 
municated. Filled  with  resentment,  he  becomes  a  pervert 
to  Judaism,  and  is  thenceforth  known  as  Aquila  the  Proselyte. 
He  devotes  himself  to  the  Jewish  learning,  and  renders  the 
Hebrew  Scriptures  into  Greek. 

Aquila,  as  a  translator,  aimed  at  an  extreme  literal  exact- 
ness, for  which  he  is,  on  the  whole,  fairly  praised  as  6  KvpLcor- 


690  THE   VERSION    OF    SYMMACHUS 

ara  ep/jLrjvevecv  (f>i\oTLiiovfxevo^  'A/cuXa?  (Origen,  Comment, 
on  Genesis,  I.  i6),  and,  on  the  other  hand,  in  places 
censured,  as  SouXevo)!/  rrj  'EfipaLKrj  Xefet  (Origen  ad  Afrtcanum 
§  2).  His  method  is,  at  times,  the  reductio  ad  absurdum  of  a 
literal  rendering;  and  yet  where  he  is  most  useless  as  an 
exegete  he  may  be  an  important  witness  on  questions  as  to 
the  form  of  the  Hebrew  text  which  lay  before  him. 

Jerome,  in  his  Epistle  to  Pammachius  (§11,  Vol.  I.  316), 
comparing  Aquila  with  the  LXX,  writes  as  follows :  "  Aquila 
autem  proselytus  et  contentiosus  interpres,  qui  non  solum 
verba  sed  etymologias  quoque  verborum  transferre  conatus 
est,  jure  projicitur  a  nobis.  Quis  enim  pro  frumento  et  vino 
et  oleo  possit  vel  legere  vel  intelligere  %€0/ia,  oirwpiaixov^  ariX- 
TTvoTTjra,  quod  nos  possumus  dicere,  fusionem,  pomationemque, 
et  splendentiamf  Aut  quia  Hebraei  non  solum  habent  dpdpa 
sed  et  irpoapOpa  ille  KaKol^rfKo)^  et  SYLLABAS  interpreta- 
tur  et  litteras,  dicitque  avv  tov  ovpavbv  /cal  avv  rr^v  yrjv^ 
quod  Graeca  et  Latina  lingua  non  recipit. "  But  elsewhere 
he  compares  him  favorably  with  the  LXX,  describing  him 
as  a  translator  who  "non  contentiosus,  ut  quidam  putant, 
sed  studiosius  verbum  interpretatur  ad  verbum"  (Ep.  ad 
Damasum,  §12,  Vol.  I.  167).  The  former  passage  aptly 
indicates  the  two  leading  principles  of  Aquila,  which  were 
to  give  a  Greek  or  quasi-Greek  equivalent  for  every  fragment 
of  the  original,  and  to  maintain  a  rigid  consistency  by  ren- 
dering each  root  with  its  real  or  apparent  derivatives  by  one 
and  the  same  root  in  Greek ;  new  forms  being  freely  coined  as 
the  occasion  demanded,  and  the  Greek  idiom  being  sacrificed 
to  the  Hebrew.     The  peculiar  etymological  rendering  of  |*1  p , 

in  Ex.  XXXIV.  29,  which,  through  the  Vulgate,  gave  rise 
to  the  popular  representation  of  Moses  with  horns  on  his 
forehead,  is  found  to  have  originated  with  Aquila :  "  Unde  et 
in  Exodo  juxta  Hebraicum  et  Aquilse  editionem  legimus, 
Et  Moyses  nesciebat  quia  cornuta  erat  species  vultus  ejus, 
qui  vere  dicere  poterat.  In  te  inimicos  meos  cornu  ventilo. " 

Aquila  has  been  accused  by  Epiphanius  of  changing 
the  Messianic  testimonies.  Not  enough  of  his  work  remains 
to  examine  if  this  charge  be  true.  Jerome  declares  in  an 
Epistle  to  Marcella,  that  he  had  examined  his  work  with 


THE   VERSION    OF    SYMMACHUS  691 

especial  attention  to  this  charge,  and  had  found  instead  many- 
things  most  favorable  to  Christian  faith.  I  am  disposed  to 
believe,  however,  that  at  times  he  drew  some  passages  to  the 
Jewish  position. 

The  second  Greek  version  which  deserves  special  mention 
is  that  of  Symmachus. 

Eusebius  relates  that  Symmachus  was  an  Ebionite,  and 
that  in  certain  of  his  writings  which  were  still  extant,  he 
alleged  arguments  from  St.  Matthew's  Gospel  in  support  of 
his  heresy.  Jerome  likewise,  in  his  Commentary  on  Habakuk 
(III.  13,  Vol.  VI.  656),  describes  Symmachus  and  Theodo- 
tion  as  Ebionites:  "Theodotio  autem,  vere  quasi  pauper  et 
Ebionita,  sed  et  Symmachus  ejusdem  dogmatis,  pauperem 
sensum  secuti  Judaice  transtulertmt ; ' '  and  in  his  preface  to 
Job  he  speaks  of  them  as  '*  judaizantes  hseretici,  qui  multa 
mysteria  Salvatoris  subdola  interpretatione  celarunt,  et 
tamen  in  'EfaTrXot?  habentur  apud  ecclesias  et  explan- 
antur  ab  ecclesiasticis  viris"  (Vol.  IX.  Col.  1142).  *'  Epiph- 
anius"  writes  Montfaucon,  "Conspecto  hexaplorum  or- 
dine,  ubi  Symmachus  ante  Theodotionem  positus  secun- 
dum locum  in  Graecis  editionibus  occupabat,  putavit  Sym- 
machum  prius  Theodotione  editionem  suam  concinnasse. " 
He  assigns  the  version  of  Symmachus,  perhaps  rightly,  to  the 
reign  of  Severus  (A.  D.  193-21 1) — the  Chronicon  Paschale 
specifies  the  ninth  year  of  this  reign — but  this  account  of  the 
author  is  at  variance  with  the  statements  of  Eusebius  and 
Jerome.  Symmachus  (he  tells  us)  was  a  Samaritan,  who, 
from  disappointed  ambition,  became  a  proselyte  to  Judaism, 
and  set  to  work  to  compose  his  Greek  version  of  the  Scrip- 
tures with  a  specific  anti-Samaritan  bias. 

The  version  of  Symmachus  was  distinguished  by  the 
purity  of  its  Greek  and  its  freedom  from  Hebraisms.  Jer- 
ome (following  Eusebius)  several  times  remarks:  *' Symma- 
chus more  suo  apertius/'  or  '' manifestius'' \  and  he  praises 
him  as  an  interpreter,  "  qui  non  solet  verborum  Ka/co^rjXiap 
sed  intelligentiae  ordinem  sequi"  (Comment,  on  Amos,  III. 
II,  Vol.  VI.  258).  In  his  preface  to  Lib.  II.  of  the  Chronic. 
Euseb.  (Vol.  VIII.  223-4),  he  writes:  ''Quamobrem  Aquila 
et  Symmachus  et  Theodotio  incitati  diversum  psene  opus  in 


692  THE   VERSION   OF   THEODOTION 

eodem  opere  prodiderunt ;  alio  nitente  verbum  de  verbo  expri- 
mere,  alio  sensum  potius  sequi,  tertio  non  multum  a  veteribus 
discrepare.''  Jerome  not  only  commends  Symmachus  as 
above,  but  frequently  adopts  his  renderings,  as  may  be 
shown  by  a  comparison  of  their  versions. 

Symma(^us  shows  his  command  over  the  Greek 
language  by  his  use  of  compounds,  where  the  Hebrew  can 
only  represent  the  same  ideas  by  a  combination  of  separate 
words ;  and  no  less  by  his  free  use  of  particles  to  bring  out 
subtle  distinctions  of  relation  which  the  Hebrew  cannot 
adequately  express.  In  like  manner,  his  rendering  of  the 
name  of  Eve  by  Zcooyovo^  preserves  the  word-play  in 
Gen.  III.  20 ;  but  other  names  are  less  happily  rendered. 

The  last  column  of  Origen's  Hexapla  contained  the  ver- 
sion of  Theodotion.  St.  Epiphanius  states  that  Theodotion 
was  of  Pont  us,  of  the  sect  of  the  Marcionites,  which  he 
abandoned  to  embrace  Judaism.  St.  Irenaeus  affirms  that 
he  was  an  Ephesian,  who  became  a  proselyte  to  Judaism. 
His  epoch  is  very  probably  the  second  half  of  the  second 
century. 

Jerome  writes  of  Theodotion:  "Qui  utique  post  adven- 
tum  Christi  incredulus  fuit,  licet  eum  quidam  dicant  Ebion- 
itam,  qui  altero  genere  Judaeus  est;"  but  elsewhere  he  seems 
to  adopt  the  tradition  of  his  Ebionism.  Montfaucon  argues 
from  his  rendering  of  Dan.  IX.  26  that  he  was  a  Jew.  His 
aim  as  a  translator  being  (again  in  the  words  of  Jerome) 
**non  multum  a  veteribus  discrepare,"  not  so  much  to  make 
a  new  translation  as  to  revise  the  old,  correcting  its  errors 
and  supplying  its  defects,  it  not  unnaturally  came  to  pass 
that  Origen  made  free  use  of  his  version  in  constructing  the 
Hexaplar  recension  of  the  LXX ;  and  that,  in  the  case  of  the 
Book  of  Daniel,  even  the  recension  of  Origen  was  popularly 
discarded  in  favor  of  Theodotion's  version  in  its  entirety. 
His  style  does  not  present  such  marked  peculiarities  as  those 
of  Aquila  and  Symmachus.  Suffice  it  to  notice  that  he  is 
more  addicted  to  transliteration  than  they  or  the  LXX ;  and 
that,  on  account  of  the  number  of  the  words  which  he  thus 
leaves  untranslated,  he  has  been  regarded  as  an  ignorant 
interpreter.     The  charge,  however,  cannot  be  sustained. 


THE    HEXAPLA    OF    ORIGEN  693 

Besides  the  aforesaid  versions,  three  others  were  in  exist- 
ence of  which  but  little  is  known.  They  are  designated  as 
Fifth,  Sixth,  and  Seventh,  from  the  position  which  they 
occupied  in  Origen's  Hexapla.  It  is  probable  that  they  did 
not  contain  all  the  books.  The  old  writers  so  differ  in  des- 
cribing where  they  were  found,  that  nothing  definite  can  be 
known  of  them.  Of  the  seventh  no  trace  remains,  and  we 
only  know  of  its  existence  from  the  fact  that  Eusebius  (Hist. 
Eccles.  VI.  1 6)  declares,  that  Origen  added  it  to  the  other  in 
the  edition  of  the  Psalms,  thereby  making  the  edition 
Enneapla. 

The  great  use  which  had  been  made  of  the  Septuagint  by 
the  Jews  previously  to  their  rejection  of  it,  and  the  constant 
use  of  it  by  the  Christians,  naturally  caused  a  multiplication 
of  copies,  in  which  numerous  errors  became  introduced,  in 
the  course  of  time,  from  the  negligence  or  inaccuracy  of 
transcribers,  and  from  glosses  or  marginal  notes,  which  had 
been  added  for  the  explanation  of  difficult  words,  and 
which  had  crept  into  the  text.  In  order  to  remedy  this 
growing  evil,  Origen,  in  the  early  part  of  the  third  century, 
undertook  the  laborious  task  of  collating  the  Greek  text, 
then  in  use,  with  the  original  Hebrew,  and  with  other  Greek 
translations  then  extant,  and  from  the  whole  to  produce  a 
new  recension  or  revision.  Twenty-eight  years  were  devoted 
to  the  preparation  of  this  arduous  work,  in  the  course  of 
which  he  collected  manuscripts  from  every  possible  quarter. 
Origen  commenced  his  labor  at  Cassarea,  A.  D.  231,  and,  it 
appears,  finished  his  Polyglot  at  Tyre,  but  in  what  year  is 
not  precisely  known. 

This  noble  critical  work  is  designated  by  various  names 
among  ancient  writers,  as  Tetrapla,  Hexapla,  Octapla,  and 
Enneapla. 

The  Tetrapla  contained  the  four  Greek  versions  of  Aquila, 
Symmachus,  the  Septuagint,  and  Theodotion,  disposed  in 
four  columns ;  to  these  he  added  two  columns  more,  contain- 
ing the  Hebrew  text  in  its  original  characters,  and  also  in 
Greek  letters.  These  six  columns,  according  to  Epiphanius, 
formed  the  Hexapla.  Having  subsequently  discovered  two 
other  Greek  versions  of  some  parts  of  the  Scriptures,  usually 


694  THE   HEXAPLA    OF    ORIGEN 

called  the  fifth  and  sixth,  he  added  them  to  the  preceding, 
inserting  them  in  their  respective  places,  and  thus  composed 
the  Octapla ;  and  a  separate  translation  of  the  Psalms,  usually 
called  the  seventh  version,  being  afterwards  added,  the  entire 
work  has  by  some  been  termed  the  Enneapla.  This  appella- 
tion, however,  was  never  generally  adopted.  But,  as  the 
two  editions  made  by  Origen  generally  bore  the  name  of 
the  Tetrapla,  and  Hexapla,  Bauer,  after  Montfaucon,  is  of 
opinion  that  Origen  edited  only  the  Tetrapla  and  Hexapla ; 
and  this  appears  to  be  the  real  fact. 

The  accompanying  plates  will  give  some  concept  of 
Origen 's  great  work. 

Aquila's  version  is  placed  next  to  the  Greek  translitera- 
tion of  the  Hebrew  text;  that  of  Symmachus  occupies  the 
fourth  column;  the  Septuagint,  the  fifth;  and  Theodotion's, 
the  sixth.  The  other  three  anonymous  translations,  not 
containing  the  entire  books  of  the  Old  Testament,  were 
placed  in  the  three  last  columns  of  the  Enneapla.  Where 
the  same  words  occurred  in  all  the  other  Greek  versions, 
without  being  particularly  specified,  Origen  designated  them 
by  A  or  AG,  Konroi,  the  rest; — Ot  F,  or  the  three,  denoted 
Aquila,  Symmachus,  and  Theodotion; — Ot  A,  or  the  four, 
signified  Aquila,  Symmachus,  the  Septuagint,  and  Theodo- 
tion; and  n,  Ilaz/Te?,  all  the  interpreters. 

Where  any  passages  appeared  in  the  Septuagint,  that 
were  not  found  in  the  Hebrew,  he  designated  them  by  an 
obelus  -^  with  two  bold  points  (:)  also  annexed.  This  mark 
was  also  used  to  denote  words  not  extant  in  the  Hebrew, 
but  added  by  the  Septuagint  translators,  either  for  the  sake 
of  elegance,  or  for  the  purpose  of  illustrating  the  sense. 

To  passages  wanting  in  the  copies  of  the  Septuagint,  and 
supplied  by  himself  from  the  other  Greek  versions,  he  pre- 
fixed an  asterisk  .x.  with  two  points  (:)  also  annexed,  in  order 
that  his  additions  might  be  immediately  perceived.  These 
supplementary  passages,  we  are  informed  by  Jerome,  were 
for  the  most  part  taken  from  Theodotion's  translation;  not 
unfrequently  from  that  of  Aquila ;  sometimes,  though  rarely, 
from  the  version  of  Symmachus ;  and  sometimes  from  two  or 
three  together.     But,  in  every  case,  the  initial  letter  of  each 


THE   HEXAPLA    OF    ORIGEN  695 

translator's  name  was  placed  immediately  after  the  asterisk, 
to  indicate  the  source  whence  such  supplementary  passage 
was  taken.     And  in  lieu  of  the  very  erroneous  Septuagint 
version  of  Daniel,  Theodotion's  translation  of  that  book  was 
inserted  entire. 

Further,  not  only  the  passages  wanting  in  the  Septuagint 
were  supplied  by  Origen  with  the  asterisks,  as  above  noticed, 
but  also  where  that  version  does  not  appear  accurately  to 
express  the  Hebrew  original,  having  noted  the  former  read- 
ing with  an  obelus,  -^,  he  added  the  correct  rendering  from 
one  of  the  other  translators,  with  an  asterisk  subjoined. 

In  the  Pentateuch,  Origen  compared  the  Samaritan  text 
with  the  Hebrew  as  received  by  the  Jews,  and  noted  their 
differences. 

Since  Origen 's  time.  Biblical  critics  have  distinguished 
two  editions  or  exemplars  of  the  Septuagint — the  Koivrj  or 
common  text,  with  all  its  errors  and  imperfections,  as  it 
existed  previously  to  his  collation,  and  the  Hexaplar  text, 
or  that  corrected  by  Origen  himself.  For  nearly  fifty  years 
was  this  great  man's  stupendous  work  buried  in  a  comer  of 
the  city  of  Tyre,  probably  on  account  of  the  very  great 
expense  of  transcribing  forty  or  fifty  volumes,  which  far 
exceeded  the  means  of  private  individuals;  and  here,  per- 
haps, it  might  have  perished  in  oblivion,  if  Eusebius  and 
Pamphilus  had  not  discovered  it,  and  deposited  it  in  the 
librar}^  of  Pamphilus  the  Martyr,  at  Caesarea,  where  Jerome 
saw  it  about  the  middle  of  the  fourth  century.  As  we  have 
no  account  whatever  of  Origen 's  autograph,  after  this  time, 
it  is  most  probable  that  it  perished  in  the  year  653,  on  the 
capture  of  that  city  by  the  Arabs ;  and  a  few  imperfect  frag- 
ments, collected  from  manuscripts  of  the  Septuagint  and 
the  Catenae  of  the  Greek  fathers,  are  all  that  now  remain  of 
the  work. 

As  the  Septuagint  version  had  been  read  in  the  Church 
from  the  commencement  of  Christianity,  so  it  continued  to 
be  used  in  most  of  the  Greek  churches ;  and  the  text,  as  cor- 
rected by  Origen,  was  transcribed  for  their  use,  together 
with  his  critical  marks.  Hence,  in  the  progress  of  time, 
from  the  negligence  or  inaccuracy  of  copyists,  numerous 


696        THE   PRINCIPAL    EDITIONS    OF   THE   SEPTUAGINT 

errors  were  introduced  into  this  version,  which  rendered  a 
new  revisal  necessary ;  and,  as  all  the  Greek  churches  did  not 
receive  Origen's  BibUcal  labors  with  equal  deference,  three 
principal  recensions  were  undertaken  nearly  at  the  same 
time,  of  which  we  are  now  to  offer  a  brief  notice. 

The  first  was  the  edition,  undertaken  by  Eusebius  and 
Pamphilus  about  the  year  300,  from  the  Hexaplar  text,  with 
the  whole  of  Origen's  critical  marks ;  it  was  not  only  adopted 
by  the  churches  of  Palestine,  but  was  also  deposited  in 
almost  every  library.  By  frequent  transcriptions,  however, 
Origen's  marks  or  notes  became,  in  the  course  of  a  few  years, 
so  much  changed,  as  to  be  of  little  use,  and  were  finally 
omittted ;  this  omission  only  augmented  the  evil,  since  even 
in  the  time  of  Jerome  it  was  no  longer  possible  to  know  what 
belonged  to  the  translators,  or  what  were  Origen's  own  cor- 
rections ;  and  now  it  may  almost  be  considered  as  a  hopeless 
task  to  distinguish  between  them.  Contemporary  with  the 
edition  of  Eusebius  and  Pamphilus,  was  the  recension  of  the 
KoLVT},  or  Vulgate  text  of  the  Septuagint,  conducted  by 
Lucian,  a  presbyter  of  the  Church  at  Antioch,  who  suffered 
martyrdom  A.  D.  311.  He  took  the  Hebrew  text  for  the 
basis  of  his  edition,  which  was  received  in  all  the  Eastern 
churches  from  Constantinople  to  Antioch.  While  Lucian 
was  prosecuting  his  Biblical  labors,  Hesychius,  an  Egyptian 
bishop,  undertook  a  similar  work,  which  was  generally 
received  in  the  churches  of  Egypt.  He  is  supposed  to  have 
introduced  fewer  alterations  than  Lucian ;  and  his  edition  is 
cited  by  Jerome  as  the  Exemplar  Alexandrinum.  All  the 
manuscripts  of  the  Septuagint  now  extant,  as  well  as  the 
printed  editions,  are  derived  from  the  three  recensions  above 
mentioned,  although  Biblical  critics  are  by  no  means  agreed 
what  particular  recension  each  manuscript  has  followed . 

There  are  four  principal  printed  editions  of  the  Septua- 
gint. The  first  in  time  was  that  of  Cardinal  Ximenes, 
printed  in  his  Polyglot,  in  151 7. 

The  second  principal  edition  is  called  the  Aldine 
Edition,  published  in  Venice  in  15 18.  It  was  called  Aldine 
from  the  printer  Aldus  Manutius,  though  it  did  not  appear 
till  two  years  after  his  death,  and  was  executed  under  the 


THE   VETUS   ITALA  697 

care  of  Andreas  Asulanus,  the  father-in-law  of  Aldus 
Manutius. 

The  third  principal  edition  in  order  of  time,  though  first 
in  excellence,  is  that  called  the  Sixtine  Edition.  It  was 
undertaken  at  the  suggestion  of  Cardinal  Montaltus,  during 
the  reign  of  Gregory  XIIL,  and  when,  at  the  death  of  Greg- 
ory, Montaltus  ascended  the  papal  throne  under  the  name 
of  Sixtus  v.,  he  brought  the  work  to  completion  and  hence 
it  bears  his  name.  Its  full  title  is  *H  liaXaia  ALudrjKrj^  Kara 
Tou?  'Fi^8ofir)KovTa  Bl  avOevTia^  BiVaTOv  K-  Afcpov  Apxtepeco^ 
cKSoOetaa.. — Vetus  Testamentum  Graecum,  jtixta  LXX  Inter- 
pretes,  studio  Antonii  Cardinalis  Carafe,  ope  virorum 
doctorum  adjuti,  cum  prefatione  et  s'choliis  Petri  Morini. 
Romae  ex  Typographia  Francisci  Zannetti,  1586,  foho. 

It  is  a  beautiful  edition,  of  great  rarity  and  value.  It 
contains  783  pages  of  text,  preceded  by  four  leaves  of  prelim- 
inary matter,  which  are  followed  by  another  (subsequently 
added),  entitled  Corrigenda  in  notationibus  Psalterii.  This 
last  mentioned  leaf  is  not  found  in  the  copies  bearing  the 
date  of  1586,  which  also  want  the  privilege  of  Pope  Sixtus 
V.  dated  May  9,  1587,  at  whose  request  and  under  whose 
auspices  it  was  undertaken  by  Cardinal  Antonio  Carafa, 
aided  by  Antonio  Agelli,  Peter  Morinus,  Fulvio  Ursino, 
Robert  Bellarmine,  Cardinal  Sirleti,  and  others.  The  cele- 
brated Codex  Vaticanus  1209  was  the  basis  of  the  Roman 
or  Sixtine  edition,  as  it  is  usually  termed.  The  first  forty- 
six  chapters  of  Genesis,  together  with  some  of  the  Psalms, 
and  the  book  of  Maccabees,  being  obliterated  from  the  Vat- 
ican manuscripts  through  extreme  age,  the  editors  are  said 
to  have  supplied  this  deficiency  by  compiling  those  parts  of 
the  Septuagint  from  a  manuscript  out  of  Cardinal  Bessa- 
rion's  library,  and  from  another  which  was  brought  to  them 
from  Calabria.  So  great  was  the  agreement  between  the 
latter  and  the  Codex  Vaticanus,  that  they  were  supposed  to 
have  been  transcribed,  either  the  one  from  the  other,  or  both 
from  the  same  copy.  Various  readings  are  given  to  each 
chapter.  This  edition  contains  the  Greek  text  only.  In 
1588,  Flaminio  Nobili  printed  at  Rome  in  folio,  Vetus  Testa- 
mentum secundum  LXX.  Latine  redditum. 


698  THE   VETUS   ITALA 

The  fourth  of  these  principal  editions  is  that  published 
by  Grabe,  at  Oxford.  This  edition  exhibits  the  text  of  the 
celebrated  Codex  Alexandrinus,  now  deposited  in  the  British 
Museum.  Though  Grabe  prepared  the  whole  for  the  press, 
yet  he  only  lived  to  publish  the  Octateuch,  forming  the  first 
volume  of  the  folio  edition,  in  1707,  and  the  fourth  volume 
containing  the  metrical  books,  in  1709. 

Chapter  XX. 
Versions  Derived  from  the  Septuagint. 

While  the  Covenant  of  God  was  restricted  to  the  Jewish 
race,  the  Hebrew  and  Septuagint  texts  sufficed  for  the 
world.  But  when  the  Message  of  Christ  spread  abroad 
through  the  nations  there  arose  a  need  for  other  versions  of 
Scripture. 

Among  these  old  versions,  one  of  the  most  important 
is  the  old  Latin  version  commonly  called  the  Vetus  Itala. 

The  origin  of  this  version  is  involved  in  obscurity,  and 
like  many  questions  of  its  kind,  furnishes  a  theme  for  many 
different  learned  conjectures.  We  shall  be  content  to  briefly 
set  forth  the  most  probable  data. 

The  language  in  which  the  message  of  Christ  was  first 
presented  to  the  Roman  world,  was  Greek.  Sufficient 
evidence  warrants  the  conclusion  that  the  liturgical  lan- 
guage of  Italy  for  the  first  two  centuries  was  Greek.  De 
Rossi  believes  that  it  was  not  till  toward  the  close  of  the 
third  century  that  Greek  was  superseded  by  Latin  in  the 
Western  Church.*  But  in  Pro-Consular  Africa,  though  the 
language  of  the  masses  was  Punic,  the  liturgical  language 
must  have  been  Latin  from  the  earliest  times.  This  has  led 
many  to  assign  Africa  as  the  place  of  origin  of  the  "Itala." 
Wiseman,  Hug,  Maier,  Hagen,  Lehir,  Himpel  and  Comely 
support  such  opinion.  Reithmayr,  Gams  and  Kaulen  place 
the  origin  of  the  version  in  Italy.     The  supporters  of  the 


*G.  B.  de  Rossi  (Roma  Sotteranea,  Roma  1867,  II.  p.  236  sq.) :  "L'uso 
costante  della  lingua  greca  in  quegli  epitaffi  (dei  romani  pontefici) .  6  prova 
manifesta,  che  greco  fu  il  linguaggio  ecclesiastico  della  chiesa  romana  nel 
secolo  terzo.  .  .  ,  Circa  la  fine  del  secolo  terzo,  o  volgendo  il  quarto,  la 
greca  lingua  ecclesiastica  cedette  in  Roma  il  luogo  alia  latina. " 


THE    VETUS    ITALA  699 

first  opinion  allege  that  the  version  would  originate  where  it 
was  needed,  and  it  would  be  assigning  too  late  a  date  to  the 
version,  to  place  it  in  the  epoch  of  the  decline  of  the  Greek 
language  in  the  West.     They  say,  moreover,  that  the  diction 
of  the  Vetus  Itala,  is  like  to  that  of  Tertullian.     Against  this 
it  may  be  urged  that  Greek  never  was  the  language  of  the 
masses  in  Italy,  and  that   the  low,  humble  diction  of  the 
Vetus  Itala  shows  that  it  was  not  the  work  of  savants ;  and 
it  bears  evidence  that  it  was  especially  intended  for  the 
humbler  classes,  and  was  most  probably  made  by  men  of 
limited  literary  ability.     Its  Latinity  is  exceedingly  barba- 
rous, so  that  Amobius  felt  called  upon  to  defend  it  against 
the  ridicule  of  the  pagans.     This  very  fact  proves  that  it 
was  not  made  by  the  principal  men  in  the  Church,  but  by 
private  individuals  for  private  use,  while  Greek  held  the 
post  of  the  authentic  Scripture  of  the  Church.     Moreover, 
the  barbarisms  of  the  Vetus  Itala,  are  by  no  means  simply 
Africanisms,  but  are  found  in  all  the  low  Latin  of  the  first 
centuries.     It  seems  that  if  the  edition  were  made  in  Africa, 
where  Latin  was  the  liturgical  language,  as  they  contend,  it 
would  be  made  by  the  chief  men  of  the  Church,  who  certainly 
could  write  better  Latin  than  the  text  of  the  Vetus  Itala.    We 
believe,  therefore,  that  in  this  question,  which  does  not 
admit  of  a  certain  answer,  the  greater  weight  of  probability 
stands  for  Italy  as  the  place  of  origin  of  the  first  Latin  trans- 
lation.    Regarding  the  mode  of  its  origin,  it  seems  quite 
certain  that  it  was  the  work  of  many  private  individuals. 
St.   Augustine,   a  most  competent  judge  in  this  matter, 
declares  the  manner  in  which  the  early  translations  were 
made: 

"  For  the  translations  of  the  Scriptures  from  Hebrew  into 
Greek  can  be  counted ,  but  the  Latin  translators  are  out  of  all 
number.  For  in  the  early  days  of  the  faith,  every  man  who 
happened  to  get  his  hands  upon  a  Greek  manuscript,  and 
who  thought  he  had  any  knowledge,  were  it  never  so  little, 
of  the  two  languages,  ventured  upon  the  work  of  transla- 
tion."    (Enchirid.  of  Christ.  Doct.  Bk.  II.  XI.)  ) 

It  is  evident  that  the  numerous  translators  did  not  trans- 
late the  whole  Bible,  but  certain  books,  so  that  there  were 


700  THE   VETUS    ITALA 

many  different  translations  of  the  several  books  made  by 
different  authors.  Jerome  complains  bitterly  of  these  nu- 
merous translators:  ''With  the  Latins  there  are  as  many 
different  versions  as  there  are  codices,  and  every  one  arbi- 
trarily adds  or  takes  away  what  he  pleases.  "  (Hier.  Praef. 
in  Josue.) 

In  this  multiplicity  of  versions  of  the  different  books 
it  soon  resulted  that  the  whole  Bible  existed  in  Latin  with 
considerable  diversity  in  the  different  codices.  It  must 
have  been  also  that  some  of  the  books  were  more  faithfully 
translated  than  others.  The  next  step  seems  to  have  been 
that  the  churches  collected  these  various  translations  of  the 
individual  books  into  complete  catalogues  of  Scripture. 
Here,  also,  diversity  resulted,  for  the  different  churches 
collected  different  versions,  and  the  works  of  the  Uhrarii 
dormitantes  and  the  imperiti  emendatores,  was  continued. 
Such  was  the  condition  of  the  Latin  text  when  Jerome  took 
it  up  and  revised  it  according  to  the  Greek.  Now,  among 
the  various  complete  versions  thus  brought  together,  Augus- 
tine designates  one  as  the  Italian  version:  "Now  among 
the  translations  themselves  the  Italian  is  to  be  preferred  to 
the  others,  for  it  keeps  closer  to  the  words,  without  prejudice 
to  clearness  of  expression."  (op.  cit.  15.)  It  is  certain, 
therefore,  that  in  Augustine's  time,  out  of  the  various  trans- 
lations of  the  individual  books,  there  had  resulted  several 
complete  versions,  among  which,  in  his  judgment,  the  Vetus 
Itala  was  pre-eminent.  It  is  probable  that  a  beginning  was 
made  to  translate  the  Scriptures  into  Latin  even  in  the 
Apostolic  age.  As  in  that  age  intense  activity  was  mani- 
fested in  all  things  that  pertained  to  religion,  without  doubt 
several  translations  of  the  different  books  were  soon  in  exist- 
ence. It  is  quite  probable  that  one  of  these  complete  ver- 
sions, at  a  very  early  age,  obtained  a  place  of  eminence  in  the 
churches  of  Italy ;  perhaps  it  was  in  a  certain  sense  author- 
ized by  the  authorities  in  those  churches.  Thus  it  came  to 
be  termed  the  *' Itala, "  and,  as  Jerome  called  it  the  old  in 
in  contradistinction  to  his  version,  it  thus  became  known  as 
the  Old  Latin  Version. 


REVISIONS    OF  JEROME  701 

Its  language  was  ruder  than  the  ordinary  Latin  of  the 
period.  It  coined  many  new  words,  adopted  many  Greek 
words  and  idioms,  and  confounded  genders,  declinations, 
and  conjugations. 

The  condition  of  the  Latin  text  in  the  beginning  of 
the  fourth  century  was  deplorable.  Innumerable  codices 
existed  widely  differing  from  each  other.  Translators, 
correctors,  and  transcribers  had  rendered  the  text  in  a  great 
measure  uncertain. 

To  remedy  this  evil  Pope  Damasus  (1384),  commissioned 
St.  Jerome  to  revise  the  Latin  text.  Jerome  began  his 
labors  at  Rome  in  ^S^,  and  first  revised  the  Psalter  "  juxta 
septuaginta  interpretes,  licet  cursim,  magna  tamen  ex 
parte."  This  emendation  is  called  the  Roman  Psalter.  It 
was  immediately  adopted  in  liturgical  use  at  Rome,  and 
remained  in  use  in  the  churches  of  Italy,  till  the  time  of  St. 
Pius  V.  (ti572).  The  same  year  he  also  corrected  the  Gos- 
pels, "  Evangelia  ad  Graecam  fidem  revocavit. "  The  norm 
of  Jerome  in  this  emendation  was  to  depart  as  little  as 
possible  from  the  usual  reading;  therefore,  "ita  calamo 
tempera vit  ut,  his  tantum  qu^  sensum  videbantur  mutare 
correctis,  reliqua  manere  pateretur  ut  fuerant."  (Hier. 
Praef.  in  Evang.)  We  find  no  prefaces  of  Jerome,  relating 
to  the  other  books  of  the  New  Testament,  for  which  cause, 
some  have  doubted  whether  he  extended  this  emendation 
beyond  the  Gospels.  As  he  speaks  in  several  places  in  his 
writings  of  his  emendation  of  the  New  Testament,  and  declares 
that  he  restored  the  New  Testament  to  the  purity  of  the 
Greek,  it  is  highly  probable  that  he  revised  the  whole  New 
Testament. 

When  Damasus  died  in  384,  Jerome  returned  to  the 
East,  and,  happening  upon  the  Hexaplar  Text  of  Origen,  at 
Caesarea,  he  made  from  that  text  a  second  emendation  of  the 
Psalter,  retaining  Origen 's  diacritic  signs.  This  emendation 
was  immediately  received  into  liturgical  use  in  the  churches 
of  Gaul ;  hence,  it  came  to  be  called  the  Gallican  Psalter.  It 
gradually  came  into  use  in  other  churches,  and  St.  Pius  V. 
authorized  it  for  the  text  of  the  Roman  Breviary.  An 
exception  was  made  in  the  case  of  the  Psalm  called  the 


702  CODICES    OF    THE   OLD    LATIN   VERSION 

Invitatorium,  XCIV.  of  the  Vulgate,  which  was  retained 
from  the  Roman  Psalter.  The  Vatican  Basilica,  the  Duomo 
of  Milan,  and  the  Chapel  of  the  Doges  of  Venice,  by  special 
privilege,  retained  in  their  liturgy  the  Roman  Psalter. 

The  Roman  Psalter  is  also  retained  in  the  Roman  Missal. 
The  Psalterium  Gallicanum  is  placed  in  the  Vulgate.  St. 
Jerome  next  revised  Job  by  the  Hexaplar  text,  which  revis- 
ion was  received  with  much  favor  by  St.  Augustine.  We 
are  certain  from  Jerome's  prefaces  that  he  emended  in  the 
same  manner  Proverbs,  Ecclesiastes,  Canticle  of  Canticles 
and  Chronicles. 

It  is  probable  that  Jerome  also  corrected,  at  this  time 
and  in  this  manner,  the  remaining  books  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, though  explicit  data  are  wanting  to  prove  it. 

Jerome  soon  after  entered  upon  the  greatest  work  of  his 
life,  the  translation  of  the  protocanonical  books  of  the  Old 
Testament,  from  the  original  Hebrew. 

Of  this  great  version  we  shall  treat  in  a  later  chapter. 
Suffice  it  to  say  here,  that  forth  from  the  sixth  century,  the 
great  translation  of  Jerome  displaced  the  Vetus  Itala,  so  that 
the  greater  part  of  this  old  version  perished.  Certain  por- 
tions of  it  are  preserved  in  the  Vulgate,  and  in  the  writings 
of  the  Fathers.  The  New  Testament  of  the  Vetus  Itala  as 
emended  by  Jerome,  the  second  emendation  of  the  Psalter, 
the  books  of  Wisdom,  Ecclesiasticus,  Baruch,  I.  and  II., 
Maccabees,  and  the  deuterocanonical  parts  of  Esther  and 
Daniel,  are  retained  from  the  Vetus  Itala  in  the  Vulgate. 

Various  collections  have  been  made  of  the  other  frag- 
ments of  the  Vetus  Itala  from  codices  and  works  of  Fathers. 
Flaminius  Nobilius  and  Agellius  were  the  first  to  collect  and 
publish  these  fragments  in  1588.  Since  that  time  fragments 
have  been  collected  and  published  by  Martianay,  Thomas 
Heame,  Sabatier,  Blanchini;  and  in  more  recent  times  by 
Vercellone,  Ranke,  Haupt,  and  Muenter. 

The  Codices  of  the  Old  Latin  version  are  designated  by 
minuscule  Italic  and  Greek  letters  the  most  important  of 
the  New  Testament  are: 


CODICES    OF    THE    OLD    LATIN   VERSION  703 

a.  Codex  Vercellensis,  at  Vercelli.  A  tradition 
asserts  that  this  was  written  by  Bishop  Eusebius  of  Vercel- 
li, who  died  in  370.     Other  scholars  place  it  much  later. 

h.     Cod  Veronensis  of  the  IV.  or  V.  century. 

c.  Cod.  Colbertinus  at  Paris  (Lat.  254)  of  the  XII. 
century. 

d.  Cod.  Bez^  of  the  VI.  century,  the  Latin  parallel  of 
Cod.  D. 

e.  Cod.  Palatinus  of  IV.  or  V.  century  at  Vienna 
(Pal.  1185). 

/.     Cod.  Brixianus  of  the  VI.  century  at  Brescia. 

ff^.  Cod.  Corbeiensis  I.  of  the  VIII.  or  IX.  century  at 
St.  Petersburg. 

fj^.  Cod.  Corbeiensis  II.  of  the  VI.  century  at  Paris. 
Both  these  formerly  belonged  to  the  monastery  of  Corbey, 
near  Amiens. 

^.  Cod.  San  germ  anensis  I.  of  the  IX.  century  now  at 
Paris  (Lat.  ii,553)- 

^.  Cod.  Sangermanensis  II.  of  the  X.  century  at  Paris. 
(Lat.,  13,169). 

h.  Cod.  Claromontanus  of  the  IV.  or  V.  century  now 
in  the  Vatican  (Lat.  7,223). 

i.  Cod.  Vindobonensis  of  the  VII.  century  at  Vienna 
(Lat.  1,235). 

j.  Cod.  Saretianus  of  the  V.  century,  discovered  in 
1872  in  the  church  of  Sarezzano  near  Tortona.  It  is  being 
collated  at  Rome. 

k.  Cod.  Bobbiensis  of  the  V.  or  VI.  century  in  the 
National  Library  at  Turin. 

The  Codex  Bobbiensis  is  more  ancient  than  any  of 
these.  It  belongs  to  the  National  Library  of  Turin;  it  is 
designated  in  the  Latin  x\pparatus  Criticus  by  the  minuscule 
letter  k. 

The  Codex  forms  a  quarto  volume  of  96  leaves  of  fine 
parchment.  The  leaves  measure  185  millimeters  by  105. 
The  pages  contain  one  column  of  14  lines.  The  script  is 
uncial,  without  ornament.  Its  date  is  placed  in  the  fifth 
century ;  and  it  must  thus  be  considered  as  one  of  the  most 
ancient  of  the  New  Testament.     Traces  of  two  correctors 


704  THE    CODEX   BOBBIENSIS 

are  recognizable  in  the  text.  One  of  these  was  contem- 
porary with  the  original  scribe;  the  other  more  modern,  is 
believed  from  the  Irish  characters  used  to  be  S.  Columban. 

The  Codex  in  its  present  state  only  contains  the  following 
fragments  of  Matthew  and  Mark;  Math.  I.  i  to  III.  lo;  IV. 
2  to  XIV.  17;  XV.  26-30;  Mark  VIII.  8-1 1,  14-16,  and  from 
VIII.  19  to  XVI.  9. 

It  is  estimated  that  the  MS.  originally  consisted  of  415 
leaves.  The  first  256  leaves  are  lost.  The  fragment  that 
remains  is  believed  to  be  a  portion  of  the  33d  cahier;  the 
following  20  are  lost.  It  originally  contained  only  the 
Gospels,  written  in  the  following  order:  John,  Luke,  Mark, 
Matthew.  This  order  also  obtains  in  the  Codex  Monacensis 
X  of  the  Gospels. 

A  modem  note  that  Tischendorf  read  on  the  Codex,  but 
which  has  since  disappeared,  made  known  that  the  Codex, 
according  to  tradition  was  one  that  St.  Columban  used  to 
carry  in  his  wallet.  St.  Columban  was  bom  about  the  year 
543,  in  Leinster.  In  613  he  passed  the  Alps,  and  founded  at 
a  short  distance  from  Piacenza,  the  monastery  of  Bobbio, 
where  he  died  in  615.  The  Irish  pilgrims  were  wont  to 
carry  the  Scriptures  in  leathern  wallets,  **sacculi  pellicei, " 
and  the  celebrated  Irish  Bible  known  as  the  Book  of  Armagh 
is  enclosed  in  its  leathern  case.  The  identification  of  the 
Codex  Bobbiensis  with  St.  Columban  is  a  possible  hypothesis 
but  not  an  established  fact.  After  the  Renaissance,  the  MSS 
of  Bobbio  were  distributed  in  the  great  libraries  of  Europe, 
and  this  Codex  found  its  resting  place  at  Turin.  It  was 
edited  by  Fleck  in  1837;  by  Tischendorf  in  1847;  ^^^  ^Y 
Wordsworth  and  Sanday  in  1886. 

The  Latin  versions  before  the  time  of  Jerome  can  be 
reduced  to  three  groups:  i. — The  African,  conformable  to 
the  citations  of  Scripture  of  St.  Cyprian;  2. — The  European, 
which  circulated  in  Western  Europe  during  the  fourth  cen- 
tury;  3. — ^The  Italian,  whose  use  is  represented  by  St.  Augus- 
tine. The  Codex  of  Bobbio  is  a  faithful  exemplar  of  the 
African  text.  See  Codex  Bobbiensis  in  Vigouroux,  Dic- 
tionnaire  de  la  Bible. 


THE    TARGUMS  705 

I.  Cod.  Rhedigeranus  of  the  VII.  century  in  the  Rhe- 
digeran  Library  at  Breslau. 

m.  This  letter  indicates  fragments  extracted  by  Car- 
inal  Mai  from  the  "Liber  de  divinis  scripturis"  ascribed  to 
St.  Augustine. 

n.  Fragmenta  Sangallensia  of  the  V.  or  VI.  century 
in  the  Stiftsbibliothek  at  St.  Gall. 

0.  Another  fragment  at  vSt.  Gall,  perhaps  of  the  VII. 
century. 

p.     A  fragment  at  St.  Gall  perhaps  of  the  VIII.  century. 

q.  Cod.  Monacensis  of  the  VII.  century,  at  Munich 
(Lat.  6,224). 

r.  Cod.  Usserianus  I.  of  the  VII.  century,  formerly 
belonging  to  Ussher,  now  at  Trinity  College,  Dublin. 

rl  Cod.  Usserianus  II.  of  the  IX.  or  X.  cent,  also  at 
Trinity  College,  Dublin. 

s.  Fragmenta  Ambrosiana  of  the  VI.  century,  in  the 
Ambrosian  Library  at  Milan. 

t.  Fragmenta  Bernensia  of  the  V.  century,  palimp- 
sest, at  Berne. 

V.     Frag.  Vind.  of  the  VII.  century  at  Vienna. 

aur.  Cod.  Aureus  of  the  VII.  or  VIII.  century  now 
at  Stockholm. 

z.     Cod.  Sangallensis  the  interlinear  Latin  of  Cod.  D. 

Besides  these  there  are  many  fragments  of  the  several 
books  of  the  New  Testament. 

Chapter  XXI. 
The  Targums 

The  Chaldee  word  DI^^IH  Targum  signifies,  in  general, 
any  version  or  explanation ;  but  this  appellation  is  more  par- 
ticularly restricted  to  the  versions  or  paraphrases  of  the  Old 
Testament,  executed  in  the  East  Aramaean  or  Chaldee  dia- 
lect, as  it  is  usually  called.  These  Targums  are  termed 
paraphrases  or  expositions,  because  they  are  rather  com- 
ments and  explications,  than  literal  translations  of  the  text. 
They  are  written  in  the  Chaldee  tongue,  which  became 
familiar  to  the  Jews  after  the  time  of  their  captivity  in 
Babylon,  and  was  more  known  to  them  than  the  Hebrew 

45  (H.S.) 


706  THE  TARGUMS 

itself;  so  that,  when  the  law  was  "read  in  the  Synagogue 
every  Sabbath  day,"  in  pure  Biblical  Hebrew,  an  explana- 
tion was  subjoined  to  it  in  Chaldee,  in  order  to  render  it 
intelligible  to  the  people,  who  had  but  an  imperfect  knowl- 
edge of  the  Hebrew  language.  This  practice,  as  already 
observed,  originated  about  the  epoch  of  the  Maccabees.  As 
there  are  no  traces  of  any  written  Targums  prior  to  those  of 
Onkelos  and  Jonathan,  who  are  supposed  to  have  lived 
about  the  time  of  our  Saviour,  it  is  highly  probable  that  these 
paraphrases  were  at  first  merely  oral;  that  subsequently, 
the  ordinary  glosses  on  the  more  difficult  passages  were  com- 
mitted to  writing;  and  that,  as  the  Jews  were  bound  by  an 
ordinance  of  their  elders  to  possess  a  copy  of  the  law^  these 
glosses  were  either  afterwards  collected  together  and  defi- 
ciencies in  them  supplied,  or  new  and  connected  paraphrases 
were  formed. 

There  are  at  present  extant  ten  paraphrases  on  different 
parts  of  the  Old  Testament,  three  of  which  comprise  the 
Pentateuch,  or  five  books  of  Moses:  i. — The  Targum  of 
Onkelos;  2. — ^That  falsely  ascribed  to  Jonathan,  and  usually 
cited  as  the  Targum  of  the  Pseudo-Jonathan;  3. — The 
Jerusalem  Targum ;  4. — The  Targum  of  Jonathan  Ben  Uzziel 
(i.  e.,  the  son  of  Uzziel)  on  the  Prophets;  5. — The  Targum  of 
Rabbi  Joseph  the  blind,  or  one-eyed,  on  the  Hagiographa; 
6. — An  anonymous  Targum  on  the  five  Megilloth,  or  books  of 
Ruth,  Esther,  Ecclesiastes,  Song  of  Solomon,  and  the  Lamen- 
tations of  Jeremiah ;  7,  8,  9. — Three  Targums  on  the  book  of 
Esther;  and,  10. — A  Targum  or  paraphrase  on  the  two 
Books  of  Chronicles.  These  Targums  taken  together,  form  a 
continued  paraphrase  on  the  Old  Testament,  with  the  excep- 
tion of  the  Books  of  Daniel,  Ezra,  and  Nehemiah  (anciently 
reputed  to  be  part  of  Ezra).  These  books  being  partly 
written  in  Chaldee,  it  has  been  conjectured  that  no  para- 
phrases were  written  on  them,  as  being  unnecessary. 

The  Targum  of  Onkelos. 

According  to  the  Babylonian  Talmud  Onkelos  was  a 
proselyte  who  lived  in  the  first  Christian  century ;  but  there 
is  no  confirmation  of  this  in  the  Jerusalem  Talmud.    Indeed, 


THE   ANCIENT   VERSIONS  707 

it  seems  probable  that  the  name  is  a  corruption  of  Aquila  the 
translator.  The  Targum  seems  rather  a  progressive  work, 
the  work  of  several  hands,  which  may  have  originated  during 
the  second  and  third  Christian  centuries.  It  is  first  quoted 
as  the  Targum  of  Onkelos  by  Gaon  Sar  Shalom  in  the  ninth 
Christian  century.  It  is  sometimes  called  the  Babylonian 
Targum,  as  it  was  revised  at  Babylon  in  the  fourth  and 
fifth  centuries  and  officially  authorized. 

Though  at  times  paraphrase  takes  the  place  of  transla- 
tion, and  there  are  halakha  and  haggada  in  it,  the  translation 
has  merit. 

The  first  edition  of  it  was  published  at  Bologna  in  1482. 
The  other  targums  are  of  secondary  importance. 

Chapter  XXII. 
The  Ancient  Versions. 


The  Syriac. 


One  of  the  most  important  of  the  ancient  versions  of 
Scripture  is  the  Syriac ;  some  of  the  Syriac  Bible  MSS  ap- 
pear to  be  the  oldest  in  any  language.  One  in  the  British 
Museum  is  dated  in  the  year  464. 

The  Aramaean  or  Syriac  (preserv^ed  to  this  day  as  their 
sacred  tongue  by  several  Eastern  Churches)  is  an  important 
branch  of  the  great  Semitic  family  of  languages,  and  as  early 
as  Jacob's  age  existed  distinct  from  the  Hebrew  (Gen.  xxxi. 
47).  As  we  now  find  it  in  books,  it  was  spoken  in  the  north 
of  Syria  and  in  Upper  Mesopotamia  about  Edessa,  and 
survives  to  this  day  in  the  vernacular  of  the  plateau  to  the 
north  of  Mardin  and  Nisibis.  It  is  a  more  copious,  flexible, 
and  elegant  language  than  the  old  Hebrew  (which  ceased  to 
be  vernacular  at  the  Babylonian  captivity)  had  ever  the 
means  of  becoming,  and  is  so  intimately  akin  to  the  Chaldee 
as  spoken  at  Babylon,  and  throughout  Syria,  that  the  latter 
was  popularly  known  by  its  name  (2  Kings  xviii.  26 ;  Isa. 
xxxvi.  11;  Dan.  ii.  4).  As  the  Gospel  took  firm  root  at 
Antioch  within  a  few  years  after  the  Lord's  Ascension  (Acts 
xi.  19-27;  xiii.  I,  &c.),  we  might  deem  it  probable  that  its 
tidings  soon  spread  from  the  Greek  capital  into  the  native 


708  THE   ANCIENT   VERSIONS 

interior,  even  though  we  utterly  reject  the  venerable 
tradition  of  Thaddaeus'  mission  to  Abgarus,  toparch  of 
Edessa,  as  well  as  the  fable  of  that  monarch's  intercourse 
vv4th  Christ  while  yet  on  earth  (Eusebius,  Eccl.Hist.,  i.  13; 
ii.  i).  At  all  events  we  are  sure  that  Christianity  flourished 
in  these  regions  at  a  very  early  period ;  it  is  even  possible  that 
the  Syriac  Scriptures  were  seen  by  Hegesippus  in  the  second 
century  (Euseb.,  Eccl.  Hist.,  iv.  22);  they  were  familiarly 
used  and  claimed  as  his  national  version  by  the  eminent 
Ephrem  of  Edessa  in  the  fourth.  Thus  the  universal  belief 
of  later  ages,  and  the  very  nature  of  the  case,  seem  to  render 
it  unquestionable  that  the  Syrian  Church  was  possessed  of  a 
translation,  both  of  the  Old  and  New  Testament,  which  it 
used  habitually,  and  for  public  worship  exclusively,  from 
the  second  century  of  our  era  downwards. 

The  great  heresies  of  Eutyches  and  Nestorius  in  the 
middle  of  the  fifth  century  rent  the  Syrian  Church,  and  drew 
great  numbers  into  one  or  the  other  of  these  sects,  but  they 
seem  not  to  have  induced  any  difference  of  opinion  among 
them  regarding  the  Holy  Scriptures. 

The  Peshitto. 

The  greatest  of  their  versions  is  the  Peshitto  or  "  simple.' ' 
Some  derive  this  name  from  the  fact  that  it  was  unprovided 
with  the  diacritical  signs  employed  by  Origen  in  his  Hexaplar 
edition  of  the  Septuagint.  Others  derive  it  from^its  faithful 
literal  character. 

The  Syrians  say  that  a  part  of  the  O.  T.  was  translated  in 
the  days  of  Solomon  at  the  request  of  King  Hiram  Another 
tradition  dates  it  from  the  advent  of  the  priest  sent  by  the 
King  of  Assyria  into  Samaria. 

It  seems  reasonably  probable  that  at  least  a  part  of  the 
Syriac  Old  Testament  is  pre-Christian.  Though  the  twen- 
ty-two books  of  the  Hebrew  Canon  were  the  first  translated, 
at  a  very  early  date  the  deuterocanical  books  were  embodied 
in  the  Canon,  as  appears  from  an  inspection  of  the  most 
ancient  MSS.  The  value  of  this  version  differs  in  the  differ- 
ent books,  as  it  is  not  all  of  a  single  hand. 


THE   ANCIENT  VERSIONS  709 

The  Peshitto  was  the  only  recognized  Syriac  version  up 
to  the  sixth  centuiy. 

A  tradition  prevails  among  the  Syrians  that  St.  Mark  the 
Evangelist  translated  the  New  Testament  into  Syriac. 
Jacob  of  Edessa  (f  701)  derived  the  version  from  King 
Abgar  and  Thaddaeus  (Addai)  the  Apostle.  Without  ac- 
cepting these  legends  we  believe  that  at  a  very  early  age  the 
New  Testament  existed  in  Syriac. 

Tatian's  Diatessaron,  made  in  the  middle  of  the  second 
century  presupposes  a  very  early  Syriac  translation. 

The  Philoxenian  and  Harkeleian  Versions. 

In  the  year  508  Aksenaya  or  Phtloxenus,  bishop  of  Mab- 
bogh  (485-519)  with  the  help  of  his  Chorepiscopus,  Polycarp 
undertook  a  literal  translation  of  the  Bible.  Besides  the 
New  Testament  the  Psalms  of  this  version  are  mentioned 
by  Moses  of  Aggel  (between  550-570).  A  portion  of  Isaiah 
is  in  the  British  Museum  (17106  Additional),  This  has 
been  edited  by  Ceriani. 

A  hundred  years  later  Paul  of  Telia  in  'Mesopotamia 
revised  it  in  Alexandria  from  MSS  which  were  derived 
from  Origen's  Hexaplar  text.  Hence  it  is  often  called  the 
Syro-Hexaplar  text.  The  New  Testament  of  this  version 
was  made  by  Thomas  of  Harkel,  as  the  following  subscrip- 
tion attests:  "This  book  of  the  four  holy  Gospels  was 
translated  out  of  the  Greek  into  Syriac  with  great 
diligence  and  labour.  .  .first  in  the  city  of  Mabug, 
in  the  year  of  Alexander  of  Macedon  819  (a.d.  508), 
in  the  days  of  the  pious  Mar  Philoxenus,  confessor, 
bishop  of  that  city.  Afterwards  it  was  collated  with 
much  diligence  by  me,  the  poor  Thomas,  by  the  help  of 
two  [or  three]  approved  and  accurate  Greek  Manuscripts  in 
Antonia,  of  the  great  city  of  Alexandria,  in  the  holy  monas- 
tery of  the  Antonians.  It  was  again  written  out  and  collated 
in  the  aforesaid  place  in  the  year  of  the  same  Alexander  927 
(a.d. 6 16),  Indiction  iv.  How  much  toil  I  spent  upon  it  and 
its  companions  the  Lord  alone  knoweth .  .  .  &c."  It  is  plain 
that  by  **its  companions"  the  other  parts  of  the  N.  T.  are 


710  THE   ANCIENT   VERSIONS 

meant,  for  a  similar  subscription  (specifying  but  one  manu- 
script)   is  annexed  to  the  Catholic  Epistles. 

This  version  contains  all  the  N.  T.  except  the  Apoca- 
lypse. 

In  1627  L.  de  Dieu  published  at  Leyden  a  MS  of  the 
Apocalypse  which  is  now  proven  by  the  labors  of  Gywnn  to 
be  of  the  hand  of  Thomas  of  Harkel.  An  earlier  MS  of  the 
Apocalypse  of  St.  John  was  published  by  Gwynn  in  1897. 

The  perikope  of  the  Adulteress  (John  VIII.  2-1 1)  is 
wanting  in  many  Syriac  texts;  but  numerous  ancient  MSS 
of  it  have  been  found  and  published. 

The  Karkaphensian  Version. 

Assemani  (Biblioth.  Orient.,  tom.  ii.  p.  283),  on  the 
authority  of  Gregory  Bar-Hebraeus,  mentions  what  has  been 
supposed  to  have  been  a  Syriac  "version"  of  the  N.  T.,  other 
than  the  Peshitto  and  Harkeleian,  which  was  named  ''Karka- 
phensian" whether,  as  he  thought,  because  it  was  used  by 
Syrians  of  the  mountains,  or  from  Carcuf,  a  city  of  Mesopo- 
tamia. Adler  (Vers.  Syr.,  p.  33)  was  inclined  to  believe  that 
Bar-Hebraeus  meant  rather  a  revised  manuscript  than  a 
separate  translation.  Cardinal  Wiseman,  (Horae  Syriacae, 
Rom.  1828),  discovered  in  the  Vatican  (Ms.  Syr.  152)  a 
Syriac  manuscript  of  readings  from  both  testaments,  with 
the  several  portions  of  the  New  standing  in  the  following 
order;  Acts,  James,  i  Peter,  i  John,  the  fourteen  Epistles  of 
St.  Paul,  and  then  the  Gospels.    . 

According  to  the  subscription  it  is  of  the  year  A.   D.  980. 

Cureton's  Version. 

In  1842  Tattam  brought  from  the  convent  of  St.  Mary 
Deipara  in  the  Nitrian  Desert  a  mass  of  MSS.  Out  of  these 
Dr.  Cureton  one  of  the  officers  of  the  British  Museum  picked 
eighty  leaves  and  a  half.  Cureton  published  these  in  1858 
with  an  English  translation,  and  a  beautiful  facsimile  by 
Mrs.  Cureton.  In  his  preface  Cureton  declared  that  he  had 
here  a  most  ancient  Syriac  translation  whose  antiquity  is 
proved  by  the  fact  that  the  fragments  of  Matthew's  Gospel 
were  made  from  Matthew's  original.  The  MSS  contain 
fragments  of  the  Four  Gospels.     Cureton  succeeded  in  per- 


THE   ANCIENT  VERSIONS  711 

suading  few  of  the  great  age  of  his  MSS.  Scholars  are  divided 
on  the  question  of  its  age  and  value ;  but  few  agree  with  its 
discoverer  regarding  the  same. 

The  Abbe  Martin  believes  that  Cureton's  Syriac  is  a 
recension  of  the  Peshitto  dating  from  the  end  of  the 
seventh  century  or  beginning  of  the  eighth,  and  that  it 
never  had  much  vogue. 

The  Sinaitic  Syriac  Palimpsest. 

In  1892  Mrs.  Agnes  Smith  Lewis  discovered  in  the  Mon- 
astery of  St.  Catherine  on  Mt.  Sinai  some  palimpsest  leaves 
of  a  Syriac  text  of  the  Gospels.  This  was  published  in  1894 
by  Bensley  Harris  and  Burkitt,  with  an  introduction  by 
Mrs.  Lewis.  She  has  supplemented  this  work  by  a  transla- 
tion of  the  Syriac  text  published  in  1896.  This  is  visually 
spoken  of  as  the  Sinaitic  palimpsest. 

The  greatest  divergency  exists  among  scholars  regarding 
its  date,  and  in  the  present  unsettled  state  of  the  question  it 
is  useless  to  venture  a  judgment. 

The  Palestinian  Syriac. 

There  exists  in  the  Vatican  Library  a  Syriac  Evangelis- 
tary called  Evangeliarium  Hierosolymitanum.  This  was 
first  described  by  Assemani  and  Adler  in  1789.  P.  Lagarde 
published  it  in  1892.     It  is  of  secondary  importance. 

The  Syriac  printed  editions  are  in  a  deplorable  state,  be- 
ing all  derived  from  the  uncritical  Paris  Polyglot  of  Michael 
le  Jay  (1645).  Walton's  Polyglot  reproduced  this  text 
without  any  important  emendations.  The  best  edition  up 
to  date  is  that  of  the  Dominicans  of  Mosul.  (3  vols. 
1887-92). 

The  Egyptian  or  Coptic  Versions. 

The  Coptic  language  is  derived  from  the  old  Egyptian 
tongue  with  numerous  Greek  words  intermingled.  This 
language  did  not  cease  to  be  spoken  in  Egypt,  until  towards 
the  middle  of  the  seventeenth  century.  The  study  of  the 
Coptic  literature  is  at  present  in  a  very  imperfect  state. 
Learned  men  have  been  studying  the  language  for  over  two 
centuries,  but  much  of  that  study  was  given  to  the  hiero- 


712  THE   ANCIENT  VERvSIONS 

glyphs,  and  the  importance  of  studying  the  Coptic  Bible  has 
only  recently  been  realized.  The  great  decadence  of  learn- 
ing among  the  Copts,  the  neglect  into  which  their  sacred 
books  had  fallen,  rendered  the  study  difficult,  and  its  results 
uncertain,  and  unsatisfactory.  The  Coptic  MSS  are  in  a 
very  bad  condition,  and  we  can  not  hope  to  give  a  full 
treatise  on  this  subject  in  the  present  condition  of  the 
science. 

The  Coptic  language  existed  in  several  important  dia- 
lects, of  which  the  first  is  the  Bohairic.  This  name  is 
derived  from  Bohairah,  the  Arabic  name  for  Lower  Egypt. 
It  was  spoken  principally  in  the  Delta  of  the  Nile,  and  at 
Alexandria,  and,  for  a  time,  was  the  only  Egyptian  language 
known  to  Europeans,  who  called  it  simply  the  Coptic  tongue. 
Later,  it  was  called  the  Memphitic,  in  contradistinction  to 
the  Thebaic  dialect.  The  term  Memphitic  applied  to  this 
language,  is  incorrect;  for  it  was  only  in  later  times,  when 
the  Coptic  patriarchs  transferred  their  seat  from  Alexandria 
to  Cairo,  that  it  spread  at  Memphis.  The  usage  of  the  best 
scholars  is  to  call  it  Bohairic. 

The  Sahidic  Dialect  is  derived  from  Es-Sahid,  the 
Arabic  designation  of  Upper  Egypt.  It  was  at  one  time 
spoken  through  all  Upper  Egypt.  It  has  been  called  The- 
baic from  Thebes,  the  capital  of  Upper  Egypt,  but  it  is  un- 
certain, whether  the  tongue  originated  at  Thebes,  and  it  is 
more  scientific  to  call  it  Sahidic,  until  new  discoveries  may 
bring  forth  a  more  correct  appellation. 

Much  uncertainty  prevails  regarding  the  third  dialect, 
which  current  usage  calls  the  Fayoumian.  It  was  discov- 
ered by  Giorgi  (Frag.  Evang.  Joh.  Grsco-Copto-Thebaicum, 
Rome,  1789).  He  termed  it  Ammonian,  believing  that  it 
had  been  spoken  in  the  Oasis  of  Ammon.  According  to 
Quatremere,  it  was  spoken  in  the  greater  and  minor  Oasis. 
Zoega  calls  it  the  Bashmuric,  while  Stem  denies  the  identity 
between  the  Fayoumian  and  the  Bashmuric. 

There  was  a  dialect  spoken  in  middle  Egypt  in  the  prov- 
ince of  Memphis,  when  this  city  had  a  certain  importance, 
to  which  the  name  of  Memphitic  would  rightly  belong,  were 
it  not  for  fear  of  confounding  it  with  the  Bohairic.     It  was 


THE   ANCIENT  VERSIONS  713 

first  made  known  by  the  publication  in  1878  in  Paris,  by  M. 
Revillout  of  some  documents  on  papyrus  coming  from  the 
old  monastery  of  St.  Jeremias,  near  Serapeum. 

The  fifth  dialect  is  made  known  from  some  fragments 
found  in  the  excavations  of  the  cemetery  of  Akhmim,  the 
ancient  Chemmis  or  Panopolis;  M.  Bouriant  who  first  pub- 
lished these  fragments  has  termed  this  dialect  the  Bash- 
muric. 

By  strong  proper  characteristics  we  can  divide  these  dia- 
lects into  Northern  and  Southern.  The  Northern  dialect  is 
represented  by  the  Bohairic,  the  other  four  dialects  are 
grouped  in  the  Southern  family,  of  which  the  Sahidic  bears 
the  greatest  divergency  from  the  Bohairic. 

Concerning  the  antiquity  of  these  dialects  the  data  is  very 
uncertain. 

Athanasius,  Bishop  of  Kos,  in  the  eleventh  century  testi- 
fied, that  the  Bohairic  and  Sahidic  alone  possessed  literary 
importance  in  his  age.  In  that  epoch,  the  monophysite  pa- 
triarchs moved  their  seat  from  Alexandria  to  Cairo,  through 
which  cause  their  tongue,  the  Bohairic  dialect,  began  to 
prevail  over  the  Sahidic,  which  latter  receded  further  south- 
ward. The  Sahidic  had  at  that  date  absorbed  the  other 
Southern  dialects,  but  was  itself  in  a  state  of  decadence 
owing  to  the  ascendancy  of  the  Arabic  in  all  Egypt.  Thus 
the  Bohairic  became  the  sole  sacred  tongue  of  all  Egypt. 
The  Arabic  has  now  almost  entirely  supplanted  it  as  the 
spoken  language  of  the  people. 

Quatremere  (Recherches,  pp.  118)  testifies  that  Marcel 
possessed  a  copy  of  a  complete  version  made  at  Cairo,  by  the 
Patriarch  of  the  See  from  old  Coptic  MSS.  After  the  death 
of  Marcel,  this  copy  was  bought  by  J.  Lee  Hart  well.  This 
copy  was  seen  in  Hartwell's  Library  in  1847  ^Y  Bardelli, 
professor  of  Sanskrit  and  Coptic,  in  the  University  of  Pisa. 
It  was  then  incomplete,  containing  only  Genesis,  Exodus, 
Leviticus,  the  Psalms,  the  twelve  Minor  Prophets,  the  four 
Gospels,  the  fourteen  Epistles  of  St.  Paul,  the  Epistle  of  St. 
James,  and  the  first  Epistle  of  St.  Peter;  in  all,  forty-one 
volumes  in  4to.  The  missing  volumes  perished  in  the  burn- 
ing of  Marcel's  house  at  Cairo.     The  books  bear  an  Arabic 


714  THE   ANCIENT   VERSIONS 

translation  opposite  the  Coptic  text.  These  books  are 
somewhere  in  England,  though,  thus  far,  they  have  not  all 
been  located. 

The  ruin  of  the  Sahidic  literature  is  greater.  Only  frag- 
ments remain  of  the  several  books  which  have  been  dug  out 
of  the  ruins  of  convents,  and  sold  by  the  Arabs  to  explorers 
and  tourists.  These  are  scattered  through  the  libraries  of 
Europe. 

Before  speaking  of  the  date  and  nature  of  the  Coptic 
Scriptures,  we  shall  first  briefly  notice  some  of  the  principal 
publications  of  this  version  in  Europe. 

In  1 731  Wilkins  published  at  London  the  Bohairic  Pen- 
tateuch. In  1837,  de  Lagarde  published  a  complete  edition 
of  the  Pentateuch,  but  in  neither  of  these  editions  was  use 
made  of  the  Vatican  MS,  the  most  ancient  and  best  of  all 
known  Coptic  MSS. 

Of  the  other  historical  books  we  have  only  fragments 
gathered  from  Coptic  liturgical  books.  De  Lagarde  collected 
these  and  published  them  in  1879.  In  1846  Tattam  pub- 
lished the  Book  of  Job.  The  Bohairic  Psalter  was  published 
in  1 744  by  Tuki  from  MS  5  of  the  Vatican.  Other  editions 
of  the  Psalter  have  been  given  by  Ideler,  Schwartz,  de 
Lagarde,  and  F.  Rossi. 

The  fragment  of  Proverbs  I.  i  -  XIV.  26,  were  published 
in  1875,  in  Latin  characters.  The  same  chapters  were  pub- 
lished again  by  Bouriant  in  1882.  The  last  named  savant 
has  also  published  fragments  of  Wisdom  and  Ecclesiasticus. 

In  1836,  Tattam  published  at  Oxford  the  Bohairic  text 
of  the  Minor  Prophets. 

Baruch  was  published  in  1870  at  Rome  from  a  MS  of 
Cairo  by  Mgr.  Bsciai. 

In  1849,  Bardelli  published  the  Bohairic  text  of  Daniel, 
which  contains  all  the  deuterocanonical  fragments.  In  1852 
Tattam  published  a  second  edition  of  the  same  text,  with  a 
Latin  translation. 

In  1852,  the  Coptic  text  of  Isaiah  and  Jeremiah  and 
Ezechiel  was  published  by  Tattam  at  Oxford. 

This  is  the  only  edition  yet  published  of  these  three 
Prophets. 


THE   ANCIENT   VERSIONS  715 

In  1 716,  David  Wilkins  published  the  entire  Bohairic 
New  Testament.  He  made  use  of  excellent  MSS,  and  his 
work  is  the  editio  prince ps,  of  the  Bohairic  Version  of  Scrip- 
ture. 

In  1846,  appeared  the  Gospels  of  Matthew  and  Mark  in 
Coptic,  by  Schwartz;  and  in  1847,  the  Gospels  of  Luke  and 
John,  by  the  same  editor.  He  had  a  better  knowledge  of 
Coptic  than  Wilkins,  though  his  edition  does  not  show  it. 
Schwartz  was  prevented  by  death  from  finishing  the  edition 
of  the  complete  New  Testament.  P.  Boetticher,  better 
known  as  Paul  de  Lagarde,  completed  it  in  1852,  on  a  more 
critical  plan. 

The  first  specimens  of  the  Sahidic  version  published  in 
Europe,  were  by  R.  Tuki  in  his  Rudimenta  Linguae  Coptae, 
in  1778.  In  1785,  Mingarelli  published  fragments  fromSS. 
Matthew  and  John  from  MSS  furnished  him  by  Cav.  Nani. 
Mingarelli,  left  the  third  part  of  the  MSS  unpublished  at  his 
death.  In  1789,  A.  Giorgi  published  a  fragment  of  St.  John, 
with  a  Greek  translation.  About  the  same  time,  Miinter, 
the  Dane,  published  several  fragments  at  Copenhagen.  In 
1778,  Woide  was  commissioned  by  the  University  of  Oxford 
to  publish  the  Sahidic  New  Testament.  Materials  accumu- 
lated, and  he  died  in  1790,  without  finishing  the  work. 
Henry  Ford  brought  it  to  completion  in  1 799.  It  is  enriched 
by  excellent  notes.  In  1801  or  1802,  Zoega  was  employed 
by  Cardinal  Borgia  to  edit  the  Coptic  Scripture  from  MSS 
then  in  the  Cardinal's  possession.  In  1804,  the  Cardinal 
died,  and  left  his  library  to  the  Propaganda.  Zoega  con- 
tinued his  work  from  the  Propaganda's  deposit.  The  work 
went  to  press  in  1805.  Litigation  with  Cardinal  Borgia's 
heirs  delayed  it  so  that  the  edition  did  not  appear  till  18 10, 
nearly  a  year  after  Zoega 's  death.  It  is  the  best  collection 
of  Coptic  literature  ever  published.  In  the  collection 
there  are  several  Sahidic  fragments. 

Nothing  more  was  done  in  Coptic  publication,  till  in  1875 
Peyron  published  the  Sahidic  Psalter.  Since  that  time, 
important  Coptic  publications  have  been  published  by  de 
Lagarde,  Agapios  Bsciai,  Ciasca,  Hermann,  Bouriant, 
Amelineau,  and  Maspero. 


716  THE    ANCIENT   VERSIONS 

Passing  over  some  isolated  and  feeble  testimonies  of 
certain  ones  who  would  make  the  Coptic  a  version  derived 
directly  from  the  Hebrew,  we  look  for  the  proofs  of  its  real 
date  in  the  rapid  spread  of  Christianity  in  Egypt.  The  first 
Christians  of  Egypt  were  probably  Hellenist  Jews,  who  made 
use  of  Greek  Scriptures,  but  from  the  advent  of  St.  Mark  the 
religion  of  Christ  spread  rapidly  among  the  native  people, 
so  that  at  his  death  in  62,  or  at  the  latest,  in  68,  Egypt  had 
many  bishops. 

During  half  a  century  after  his  death,  peace  reigned,  and 
the  faith  of  Christ  was  allowed  to  fix  its  roots  deeply  in 
Egypt.  At  the  end  of  the  third  century,  Egypt  was  solidly 
and  universally  Christian ;  it  had  bishops  in  every  place,  and 
monasticism,  inaugurated  by  St.  Anthony,  was  a  strong  and 
growing  institution.  The  first  evangelists  of  Egypt,  doubt- 
less, made  use  of  the  Greek  tongue.  In  fact,  for  centuries, 
Greek  remained  the  official  liturgical  and  Scriptural  tongue. 
This  is  clearly  proven  by  several  Graeco-Coptic  MSS  which 
have  been  preserved  for  us.  But  it  is  probable  that,  at  the 
same  time,  Coptic  translations  of  Scripture  were  made  in  the 
second  century.  At  that  epoch,  the  native  population 
formed  the  body  of  Christian  laity  and  clergy.  Now  the 
common  people  knew  no  Greek.  What  is  a  probability  in 
the  second  century,  is  a  certainty  in  the  third  century. 

Many  passages  in  the  life  of  St.  Anthony  (25 1-256)  (Patr. 
Grasca,  Tom.  XXVI.  Col.  841,  944  et  seqq.)  prove  that  the 
saintly  hermit  knew  no  tongue  but  the  native  Egyptian ;  and 
yet  he  was  moved  to  leave  the  world  by  hearing  the  reading 
of  the  passage  concerning  the  rich  young  man  (Matth.  XIX. 
16).  St.  Athanasius  informs  us  that  Anthony  was  well 
versed  in  Scripture,  and,  therefore,  it  must  have  been  in  the 
Coptic  Scriptures.  In  fact,  in  the  writings  that  have  come 
down  to  us  of  St.  iVnthony,  frequent  quotations  of  both 
Testaments  appear. 

History  bears  record  of  a  great  number  of  bishops  and 
monks  of  that  epoch  who  were  well  versed  in  the  Holy  Scrip- 
tures, and  yet  they  knew  no  Greek.  The  tongue  of  the 
monasteries  was  Coptic.  St.  Pacomius  (292-348)  did  not 
learn  Greek  till  at  an  advanced  age  (Rosweyde) ;  and  in  the 


THE   ANCIENT   VERSIONS  717 

rules  of  his  monastery  (Patr.  Lat.  Migne,  23,  Col.  70)  it  was 
established  that  the  study  of  the  Scriptures  was  one  of  the 
chief  employments  of  the  monks.  Postulants  were  required 
to  memorize  the  Psalter.  Epiphanius  informs  us  that 
Hierax,  the  heretic,  being  well  versed  in  Greek  and  Coptic 
and  in  the  Scriptures,  seduced  certain  monks  of  Egypt  by 
arguments  drawn  from  the  Scriptures.  Hence  we  place  the 
date  of  the  Coptic  Scriptures  about  the  close  of  the  second 
century. 

Wetstein  and  Stem  denied  the  antiquity  of  the  Coptic 
version,  but  the  former  was  ably  refuted  by  Woide,  and  the 
latter  by  Headlam. 

It  is  evident  from  these  data  that  the  Coptic  version  was 
made  from  the  Septuagint,  except  in  the  Book  of  Daniel, 
where  the  text  of  Theodotion  is  taken  for  the  basic  text. 
The  Bohairic  and  Sahidic  versions  are  independent  from  each 
other,  and  seem  to  have  been  made  from  different  recensions 
of  the  Greek  text. 

The  Coptic  versions  are  of  great  worth  in  textual  criti- 
cism. They  exhibit  a  reproduction  of  the  Greek  text  before 
it  had  suffered  the  numerous  modifications  that  came  into 
it,  after  the  issue  of  the  Hexapla  of  Origen.  The  learned 
Catholic,  A.  Schulte,  has  given  us  a  critical  edition  of  the 
Prophets.  The  celebrated  reference  of  Matthew  XXVII. 
9-10,  is  found  in  both  the  Bohairic  and  Sahidic  texts  of 
Jeremiah.* 

The  Bohairic  New  Testament  is  purer  than  the  Sahidic, 
which  gives  indication  of  its  remoter  date. 

Mgr.  Ciasca  has  made  a  critical  study  of  the  Sahidic 
version.  He  finds  that  it  has  felt  the  influence  of  the  hex- 
aplar  text,  and  it  is  probable  that  the  version  as  we  have  it, 

*Iteruin  dixit  Jeremias  Pashori:  Eritis  aliquando  cum  patribus  vestris 
repugnantes  veritati,  et  filii  vestri  venturi  post  vos,  isti  facient  iniquita- 
tem  magis  abominandam  quam  vos.  Nam  ipsi  dabunt  pretium  pro  eo  cui 
nullum  est  pretium.  Et  nocebunt  ei  qui  sanat  morbos,  et  in  remissionem 
peccatorum.  Et  accipient  triginta  argenteos  in  pretium  ejus  quem  tra- 
dent  filii  Israelis.  Et  ad  dandum  id,  pro  agro  figuli,  sicut  mandavit 
Dominus.  Etdicent:  Veniet  super  eos  judicium  perditionis  in  setemum 
et  super  filios  corum  quia  condemnaverunt  sanguinem  innocentem. 


718  THE    ANCIENT    VERSIONS 

is  a  later  recension,  made  to  accord  with  some  recension  of 
the  Greek  text. 

The  Sahidic  New  Testament,  has  been  studied  by  Muen- 
ter.     It  is  inferior  to  the  Bohairic  version. 

The  fragments  of  the  Akmimian  version,  commonly- 
called  the  Bashmuric  fragments,  were  published  by  Bou- 
riant.  Krall  has  also  given  us  a  specimen  of  a  fragment  of 
the  Minor  Prophets.  But  it  has  not  been  studied  suffi- 
ciently to  judge  of  its  critical  value.  The  Fayoumian  version 
and  the  version  of  Middle  Egypt,  which  once  were  identified 
with  the  Sahidic  version,  must  be  considered  as  separate 
groups,  but  our  knowledge  of  them  is  very  imperfect. 

The  Ethiopic  Version  of  Scripture. 

Concerning  the  evangelization  of  Ethiopia,  Rufinus  gives 
us  the  following  data.  Meropius,  a  philosopher  of  Tyre,  set 
out  on  a  voyage,  having  in  mind  to  visit  that  region  which  in 
those  days  was  called  India.  He  brought  with  him  two 
youths,  Edesius  and  Frumentius,  for  whose  education  he  was 
providing.  Having  concluded  their  observations,  they  set 
sail  for  their  own  country,  and  while  passing  the  coast  of 
Abyssinia,  the}^  touched  at  a  certain  port  for  water  and 
other  necessary  articles.  The  natives  w^ere  at  that  time 
incensed  against  Rome,  and  they  set  upon  Meropius  and  his 
crew  and  slew  them.  They  spared  the  two  youths,  Edesius 
and  Frumentius,  whom  they  brought  to  the  King.  Edesius 
was  appointed  his  cup-bearer;  and  Frumentius,  his  secretary. 
Forthwith  the  King  held  them  in  high  honor,  and  love.  At 
his  death,  he  left  the  kingdom  to  his  Queen  and  infant  son. 
He  gave  Edesius  and  Frumentius  their  liberty.  The  Queen 
besought  them,  that  they  would  remain  and  administer  the 
kingdom  till  her  son  should  come  to  that  estate  in  which  he 
could  sustain  the  burden  of  the  office.  She  especially 
required  the  help  of  Frumentius,  whose  prudence  all  recog- 
nized. They  remained,  and  Frumentius  became  regent  of 
the  realm.  As  they  were  both  Christians,  Frumentius  began 
to  make  use  of  his  great  power  by  favoring  the  Christian 
merchants,  who  came  to  the  kingdom  to  trade ;  and  by  his 
exhortation   and   active   help,   many   churches   were   con- 


THE   ANCIENT  VERSIONS  719 

structed,  and  many  natives  converted  to  Christianity. 
When  the  Prince  came  to  his  majority,  Edesius  and  Frumen- 
tius  set  out  for  their  own  country.  Edesius  came  to  Tyre, 
and  was  made  Bishop  of  that  See.  Frumentius  went  to 
Alexandria  and  laid  before  St.  Athanasius,  the  Patriarch, 
the  condition  of  the  land,  which  he  had  left,  and  its  need  of  a 
bishop  and  priests. 

Athanasius,  in  a  council  of  priests,  elected  Frumentius 
himself  to  be  bishop  of  the  strange  country.  He  soon  after 
received  ordination  and  consecration  from  St.  Athanasius, 
and  returned  to  the  scene  of  his  first  labors.  The  richest 
fruits  rewarded  his  apostolic  labors,  and  an  immense  number 
of  the  natives  received  the  faith  of  Christ.  Rufinus  declares 
that  he  received  these  data  from  Edesius  himself.  (P.  L. 
Migne,  21,  478.) 

This  would  bring  the  evangelization  of  Abyssinia  in  the 
beginning  of  the  fourth  century.  In  that  time  Abyssinia 
formed  the  old  kingdom  of  Auxuma. 

When  Constantius  succeeded  Constantine,  he  endeavored 
to  move  the  King  of  Auxuma  to  expel  Frumentius,  and 
receive  Arianism.  This  attempt  failed,  but  in  the  sixth 
century,  through  the  influence  of  the  Monophysite  Patri- 
archs of  Alexandria,  the  Copts  fell  into  the  Monophysite 
heresy,  and  there  is  little  of  orthodox  Catholicity  left  in  the 
country  now. 

The  Ethiopians  call  Frumentius,  Abba  Salama.  It  is 
evident  that  he  could  make  little  progress  in  evangelizing  the 
country  by  means  of  Greek  Scriptures,  of  which  the  people 
knew  nothing.  The  data  seem  to  warrant  that  Frumentius 
chose  the  Ghez  dialect,  which  was  spoken  at  the  court  and 
among  the  upper  classes,  and  translated  into  this  the  Holy 
Scriptures.  We  believe,  therefore,  that  the  Ethiopic  liturgy 
and  version  of  Scripture  go  back  to  the  fourth  century.  The 
Ghez  dialect  no  longer  prevails  in  Abyssinia.  In  1300  the 
Amharic  dialect  began  to  supplant  the  old  Ghez,  and  now  the 
Amharic  is  spoken  throughout  the  country.  In  the  years 
between  1810  and  1820,  AsseHn  de  Cherville,  the  French  con- 
sul at  Cairo,  translated,  by  the  aid  of  Abou-Roumi,  the 
Scriptures  into  Amharic.     His  version  was  purchased  by  the 


720  THE    ANCIENT    VERSIONS 

British  Bible  Society.  J.  P.  Piatt  revised  it,  and  published 
the  Gospels  in  1824.  He  published  the  whole  New  Testa- 
ment in  1829,  and  the  whole  Bible  in  1842.  In  1875  the 
society  published  a  new  edition,  under  the  supervision  of 
Krapf  and  several  Abyssinians. 

An  inspection  of  the  Ethiopic  text,  clearly  reveals  that  it 
was  made  from  the  Greek.  Many  difhcult  Greek  words  are 
left  untranslated.  Certain  errors  also  are  explained  from  a 
misapprehension  of  the  Greek  text.  Evidences  are  found 
that  more  than  one  interpreter  labored  in  the  translation. 
The  original  interpreters  followed  the  Greek  text  closely, 
and  the  edition  would  be  of  much  critical  worth  in  restoring 
the  Greek  text  of  that  age,  if  it  had  come  down  to  us  uncor- 
rupt ;  but  great  freedom  was  used  by  later  hands  in  interpo- 
lating many  passages,  so  that  a  critical  edition  is  necessary 
before  the  book  will  be  of  any  critical  worth. 

No  complete  edition  of  the  ancient  text  has  ever  been 
published.  In  15 13  John  Potken  published  the  Psalter  and 
some  canticles  from  the  New  Testament.  In  15 18  he 
published  the  Canticle  of  Canticles.  In  1548  the  New  Testa- 
ment was  published  at  Rome.  Some  other  unimportant 
and  modern  editions  have  been  wrought,  but  the  codices 
anterior  to  the  fifteenth  century  have  not  been  examined, 
and  the  outlook  for  the  old  text  seems  dark. 

The  Gothic  Version. 

The  Goths  were  a  Germanic  gens  who,  in  the  second 
centur}^  spread  from  the  Vistula  to  the  Danube.  Some  of 
them  were  converted  in  the  third  century  to  Christianity. 
Theophilus,  the  Gothic  bishop,  sat  in  the  Council  of  Nice, 
and  signed  the  decree  of  the  Consubstantiality  of  the  Son  of 
God.  In  the  fourth  century,  they  were  expelled  from  their 
lands  by  the  Huns.  They  receded  Eastward,  and  took  up 
their  abode  within  the  realm  of  the  Byzantine  Empire.  As 
Arianism  was  in  the  ascendancy  at  the  court  of  the  Emperor 
Valens,  and  in  the  realm,  they  soon  lapsed  into  that  heresy. 

The  Gothic  version  is  inseparably  associated  with  Ulfilas. 
According  to  Philostorgius  his  contemporary  Ulfilas  was  bom 
of  Christian  parents  in  Dacia  between  310  and  313.     He  was 


THE   ANCIENT   VERSIONS  721 

consecrated  bishop  about  the  year  340.  It  seems  probable 
that  it  was  after  the  retreat  of  the  Goths  into  Moesia  that 
Ulfilas  translated  the  Scriptures.  It  is  probable  that  at 
that  time  he  had  embraced  the  Arian  heresy. 

The  Goths  in  that  age  had  no  alphabet.  Ulfilas  adopted 
the  old  Runic  characters  with  some  additions  from  the 
Greek. 

Philostorgius  testifies :  "that  Ulfilas  translated  into  his 
mother  tongue,  all  the  books  of  Holy  Scripture  except  the 
books  of  Kings,  for  the  reason  that  these  contain  the  account 
of  wars,  and  the  Goths  naturally  delight  in  warfare,  and  have 
more  need  to  be  held  back  from  battles  than  to  be  spurred 
on  to  warlike  deeds."  (Hist.  Eccles.  XI.  5.)  This  seems 
improbable,  and  is  disproven  by  the  discovery  by  Mai,  in 
181 7,  in  the  Ambrosian  Library,  of  a  palimpsest  fragment  of 
the  Gothic  text  of  Kings. 

The  version  of  |Ulfilas  was  in  universal  use  among  the 
Goths,  while  they  retained  their  individuality  as,  a  race  but 
later  their  language,  and  their  version  passed  into  oblivion. 

In  1669,  the  Chancellor  of  Queen  Christina  of  Sweden, 
Gabriel  de  la  Gardie,  presented  to  the  University  of  Upsal 
several  MSS,  among  which  was  one  which  is  since  known  as 
the  Codex  Argenteus.  Investigation  proved  it  to  be  a  Codex 
of  the  Gothic  Gospels.  It  is  called  Argenteus,  either  because 
its  binding  is  of  massive  silver,  or  because  its  letters  are  of 
silver. 

In  181 7  Cardinal  Mai  discovered  among  some  palim- 
psest Codices  in  the  Ambrosian  library  at  Milan  fragments  of 
Kings,  Ezra,  Nehemiah  of  the  Gothic  version.  By  the  help 
of  Carolo  Ottavio  Castillionei  five  other  fragments  were 
deciphered  under  other  writings. 

The  portions  of  the  Gothic  version  of  the  Old  and  New 
Testament,  printed  by  Signors  Mai  and  Castillionei,  are  I. 
Nehemiah,  Chap.  V.  verses  13-18;  Chap.  VI.  14-19,  and  VIII. 
1-3 ;  II. ;  a  Fragment  of  Saint  Matthew's  Gospel,  contain- 
ing Chap.  XXV.  38-46;  XXVI.  1-3;  65-75,  and  XXVII.  i; 
III.;  part  of  St.  Paul's  Epistle  to  the  Philippians,  Chap.  II. 
22--30,   and  III.    1-16;  IV.;  Saint  Paul's  Epistle  to  Titus, 

46  (H.S.") 


722  THE   ANCIENT   VERSIONS 

Chap.  I.  1-16;  II.  I.;  and  V.  Verses  11-23  of  his  Epistle  to 
Philemon. 

It  is  to  be  regretted  that  we  have  no  critical  edition  of  the 
Gothic  Scriptures. 

The  Armenian  Version  of  Scripture. 

The  evangelization  of  Armenia  was  wrought  by  Gregory 
the  Illuminator,  in  the  first  years  of  the  fourth  century. 
Sozomen  informs  us  that  Tiridates  was  first  converted,  and 
then  by  public  edict  bade  Armenia  receive  the  faith  of  Christ. 
(Hist.  Eccles.  II.  8.) 

For  more  than  a  century  the  Armenians  had  no  proper 
version  of  Scripture  nor  liturgy.  They  made  use  of  the 
Syriac  text.     At  that  time  they  had  no  alphabet. 

When  Isaac  became  patriarch  (390-440),  St.  Mesrob,  his 
co-laborer,  gave  himself  to  invent  an  alphabet.  He  traveled 
much  and  consulted  many  learned  men,  and  finally,  in  406, 
he  perfected  an  alphabet  of  thirty-six  letters,  by  which  all 
the  sounds  of  the  Armenian  language  are  expressed. 

When  Mesrob  had  arranged  the  Armenian  alphabet 
(406  A.  D.)  he  undertook,  under  the  direction  of  the  Patri- 
arch Isaac,  and  with  the  aid  of  his  principal  disciples,  John 
Egueghiatz  and  Joseph  Baghin,  a  translation  of  *'  the  twenty- 
two  canonical  books  of  the  Old  Testament  and  a  translation 
of  the  New  Testament."  This  work  was  finished  in  411. 
Cfr.  Gorioun,  Biography  of  Mesrob,  in  Langlois'  Collection  of 
Ancient  and  Modern  Histories  of  Armenia,  2  vols,  in  4mo, 
Paris,  1839,  t.  II.  p.  io;T.  Neve,  Christian  Armenia  and  its 
Literature,  in  8mo,  Paris,  1886,  p.  13,  22.  Cfr.  Moses  of 
Khorene,  III.  53.  This  first  version  was  made  by  Saint 
Isaac  from  the  Syriac,  says  Moses,  the  historian.  III.  54, 
because  no  one  possessed  the  Greek  text,  and  the  more, 
because  the  Syriac  tongue  had  been,  for  different  reasons, 
the  liturgical  language  in  certain  countries  of  Armenia,  up  to 
the  time  of  the  invention  of  the  Armenian  alphabet  by 
Mesrob.  Gorioun,  Biography  of  Mesrob,  p.  11;  Lazare  de 
Pharbe,  Histoire  X.  in  Langlois'  Collection,  t.  11.  p.  226. 
Cfr.  Saint  Martin,  Historical  and  Geographical  Memoirs  of 
Armenia,  2  in  8mo,  Paris,  1819,  t.  I.  p.  11 ;   Tchamitchian, 


THE    ANCIENT   VERSIONS  723 

History  of  Armenia  Translated  by  Avdall,  2  in  8mo.,  Calcutta, 
1827,  t.  I.  p.  239;  R.  Simon,  Critical  History  of  the  Versions 
of  the  New  Testament,  in  4mo,  Rotterdam,  1690,  p.  196. 
This  first  work,  made  in  haste,  from  indifferent  exemplars 
doubtless  was  defective  in  many  things.  Some  years  later, 
Isaac  and  Mesrob  sent  John  Baghin  with  Eznik,  another  of 
their  disciples,  to  Edessa,  that  they  might  translate  the  Holy 
Scriptures  from  the  Syriac  into  the  Armenian.  [Gorioun, 
Biography  of  Mesrob,  p.  11 -12.]  These  two  young  men 
repaired  from  Edessa  to  Byzantium,  where  they  were 
rejoined  b}^  other  disciples  of  Mesrob,  among  whom  was 
Gorioun,  the  author  of  the  Biography  of  Mesrob.  They 
passed  several  years  at  Byzantium,  and  were  still  there  at 
the  time  of  the  Council  of  Ephesus  (431).  Their  labors 
ended,  they  returned  to  Armenia,  having  among  their  literary 
effects  the  Acts  of  the  Council,  and  authentic  copies  of  the 
Holy  Scriptures  in  Greek.  [Gorioun,  ibid.]  Isaac  and  Mes- 
rob immediately  sought  to  turn  these  latter  to  good  account, 
and  retouch  the  old  version  made  from  the  Syriac,  by  exactly 
comparing  it  with  the  authentic  copies  which  had  been 
brought  to  them.  But  the  translators  who  worked  under 
their  orders  did  not  have  a  sufficient  knowledge  of  the  Greek 
language,  and  their  labor  was  judged  very  imperfect.  They, 
therefore,  sent  other  young  men  to  study  Greek  at  Alexan- 
dria. Moses  of  Khorene  was  among  this  number.  (Moses 
of  Khorene,  III.  61)  They  doubtless  brought  back  from 
Egypt,  other  Greek  exemplars  of  the  Bible,  which  they  used 
to  perfect  the  work  of  their  predecessors  in  faithfully  trans- 
lating the  text  of  the  Septuagint  from  the  Hexapla  of 
Origen ;  because  the  same  signs  and  asterisks  are  found  in  the 
old  Armenian  manuscripts  of  the  Bible.  Cfr.  P.  Zohrab, 
Armenian  Bible,  4  in  Smo,  Venice,  1805,  Introd.  p.  6,  7. 
See  Gorioun,  Biography  of  Mesrob,  p.  11,  12.  Moses  of 
Khorene,  III.  61 ;  Tchamitchian,  History  of  Armenia,  I.  i.  p. 
239.  Langlois,  {Collection,  t.  II.  p.  168,  note),  says  that  this 
version  was  officially  adopted  by  the  Fathers  of  the  Council 
of  Ashdishad,  in  434.  If  the  fact  and  the  date  are  correct, 
the  approbation  of  the  Fathers  can  refer  only  to  the  first 
version  made  from  the  Greek.     Vide  P.    Donat    Vernier, 


724  THE  ANCIENT  VERSIONS 

Histoire  du  Patriarcat  Armenien  Catholtque,  in  8mo,    Paris, 
1891,  p.  128-129. 

The  Armenian  version  follows  very  closely  the  Greek 
text  for  the  Old  Testament  as  well  as  for  the  New.  The 
Greek  text  which  it  follows  can  not  be  reduced  to  any 
known  recension,  which  is  explained,  perhaps,  by  the  fact 
mentioned  above,  that  some  of  the  Greek  manuscripts  which 
the  translators  used,  came  from  Constantinople,  or  Ephesus, 
while  others  came  from  Alexandria.  Bertholdt,  Einleitung, 
t.  II.  p.  560,  believes  that  the  former  belong  to  the  recension 
of  Lucian,  and  the  latter  to  that  of  Hesychius. 

The  Armenian  version  is  very  little  known.  The  major- 
ity of  scholars  who  have  occupied  themselves  with  the  criti- 
cism of  the  Greek  text  of  the  Bible,  did  not  know  the  Arme- 
nian language. 

In  1662,  the  Armenian  Patriarch  James  IV.  sent  Bishop 
Uscan  to  Europe  to  manage  the  publication  of  an  Armenian 
Bible.     He  came  to  Rome,  and  sojourned  five  months. 

As  the  Propaganda  was  not  certain  of  his  orthodoxy,  he 
was  unable  to  realize  his  project  at  Rome;  whereupon,  he 
withdrew  to  Amsterdam,  where  he  published  a  complete  Old 
Testament  in  1666,  and  the  New  Testament  complete  in 
1668.  The  edition  of  Uscan  was  not  approved  by  Rome. 
It  is  very  imperfect. 

The  work  of  Uscan  was  perfected  by  the  Armenian 
religious,  called  the  Mekhitarists  at  Venice. 

In  1805  appeared  the  complete  edition  of  the  Scriptures 
by  Zohrab,  one  of  the  Mekhitarists.  At  first,  the  book  of 
Ecclesiasticus  was  placed  in  the  appendix  with  certain  apoc- 
ryphal books.  They  discovered  later  a  Codex  of  Ecclesias- 
ticus of  the  fifth  century,  and  in  a  later  edition  in  1859,  re- 
stored Ecclesiasticus  to  its  proper  place.  The  verse  of  I. 
John  V.  7,  is  omitted  in  this  edition. 

Many  editions  have  been  published  since  that  time,  of 
which  there  is  no  need  to  speak. 

The  people  living  about  Iberia  and  the  region  about  Mt. 
Caucasus,  who  are  termed  Georgians,  or  Grusians,  are  said  to 
have  been  converted  in  the  fourth  century  by  Armenians.  In 
the  life  of  St.  Mesrob,  it  is  stated  that  he  also  gave  an  alpha- 


THE   ANCIENT   VERSIONS  725 

bet  to  this  people.  They  received  their  Scriptures  from  the 
Armenians,  and  it  is  uncertain  whether  the  translation  into 
their  proper  tongue  was  made  in  the  sixth  or  eighth  century. 
It  is  also  uncertain  whether  it  was  made  from  the  Greek  or 
Armenian  text.  The  Georgian  tongue  is  but  little  known, 
and  no  scholar  has  given  us  the  resources  of  the  aforesaid 
version  of  Scripture. 

There  was  printed  at  Moscow,  in  1743,  an  edition  of 
Georgian  Scripture,  based  upon  the  Russian  text,  whence  it 
is  evident  that  it  is  of  no  critical  worth. 

The  other  Eastern  versions  are  late  and  unimportant. 
In  the  ninth  century,  SS.  Methodius  and  Cyril  gave  to  the 
Slavs  a  Slavonic  translation  of  Scripture,  most  probably 
made  from  the  Greek  text. 

The  Arabic  translations,  some  of  which  appear  in  Wal- 
ton's Polyglot,  were  made  in  the  tenth  and  twelfth  centuries 
and  are  of  no  critical  worth. 

The  Persian  text  of  the  Gospels  which  appears  in  Wal- 
ton's Polyglot,  was  made  from  the  Syriac  Peshitto.  Its 
date  is  uncertain,  but  it  is  later  than  the  eighth  century. 

Saadias  Haggaon,  a  Jew  living  in  Egypt  in  the  tenth  cen- 
tury, translated  the  Pentateuch  from  the  Masoretic  text 
into  Arabic.  In  many  places  the  work  assumes  the  nature 
of  a  paraphrase.  Translations  by  Saadias  also  exist  of 
Isaiah,  the  Minor  Prophets,  the  Psalter  and  Job. 

The  Arabic  text  of  the  Pentateuch  by  Saadias  is  pub- 
lished in  Walton's  Polyglot. 

In  1662,  Erpenius  published  an  Arabic  translation  of  the 
Pentateuch  from  a  MS  belonging  to  Joseph  Scaliger.  This 
is  called  the  Arabs  Erpenii.  It  was  made  from  the  Mas- 
oretic text  by  a  Jew  in  the  eighth  century,  and  is  of  no  criti- 
cal value. 

We  know  not  the  date  or  the  author  of  the  Arabic  text 
of  Joshua  published  by  Walton.  There  are  also  Arabic  frag- 
ments of  Kings,  and  of  Ezra  whose  origin  is  uncertain. 

There  is  also  a  version  of  the  Pentateuch  made  by  Abou 
Said,  a  Samaritan,  at  an  uncertain  date  ranging  between  the 
tenth  and  eleventh  centuries.  It  was  made  from  the  He- 
brew text  of  the  Samaritan  Codex  in  Samaritan  characters. 


726  THE   VULGATE 

The  Arabic  text  of  the  Prophets  which  appears  in  Wal- 
ton's Polyglot,  was  made  from  the  Septuagint,  and  Theodo- 
t ion's  version  of  Daniel.  The  Arabic  text  of  the  other  books 
which  appears  therein  was  made  also  from  the  Greek  at 
uncertain  dates,  but  all  later  than  the  tenth  century. 

The  Arabic  text  of  the  New  Testament  was  made  directly 
from  the  Greek.  Its  date  is  unknown,  but  the  eighth  cen- 
tury would  be  the  earliest  possible  date. 

The  Persian  Pentateuch  of  Walton  was  made  by  a  Jew  of 
the  sixteenth  century.  It  follows  the  Masoretic  text  ser- 
vilely,and  is  of  small  critical  worth.  The  Persian  text  of 
the  Gospels  which  was  made  from  the  Greek,  is  assigned  to 
the  fourteenth  century.  Other  versions  may  exist,  but  they 
have  not  been  studied. 

Chapter  XXIII. 
The  Vulgate. 

We  have  sufficiently  discoursed  of  the  causes  and  move- 
ments which  led  up  to  Jerome's  great  translation,  which, 
from  its  constant  and  universal  use  in  the  Church  of  God, 
has  been  aptly  called  the  Vulgate. 

It  was  in  his  cell  at  Bethlehem,  about  the  year  389,  that 
Jerome  began  his  great  work.  His  design  was  not  favored 
by  the  clergy  of  Rome,  who  accused  him  of  endeavoring  to 
set  aside  the  Septuagint  and  the  Vetus  Itala.  He  declares 
that  such  was  not  his  intent,  but  only  to  furnish  a  translation 
that  the  Jews  could  not  reject  in  controversy  with  the 
Christians.  Jerome  never  foresaw  the  great  results  that 
were  to  follow  from  his  labors.  He  began  with  the  books  of 
Samuel  and  Kings.  In  393  he  had  completed  these,  together 
with  the  sixteen  Prophets,  the  Psalter  and  Job.  The  work 
was  then  intermitted  for  some  time.  In  395  he  translated 
Ezra  and  Chronicles.  These  were  followed  by  a  translation 
of  Proverbs,  Ecclesiastes  and  the  Canticle  of  Canticles.  The 
work  of  translating  the  Pentateuch,  Joshua,  Judges  and 
Ruth  was  begun  in  398  and  terminated  in  404.  Some  time 
in  this  period,  Jerome  translated  Tobias  and  Judith  from  the 
Chaldaic  text. 


THE   VULGATE 


727 


Jerome's  version  of  the  Psalter  was  never  received  into 
common  use  by  the  Church.  The  probable  cause  was  the 
danger  of  scandal  to  the  common  people,  who  committed 
much  of  the  Psalter  to  memory.  Had  Jerome's  translation 
been  substituted  for  the  old  text,  the  simple  people  would 
have  been  unable  to  reconcile  the  wide  divergency  of  the  two 
texts  with  their  reverence  for  Holy  Scripture. 

Jerome  was  guided  in  his  method  of  translation  by  two 
norms,  i . — The  great  and  principal  norm  was  to  reproduce 
the  sense,  not  binding  himself  to  text,  word  for  word.  What 
ever  may  be  Jerome's  declaration  concerning  his  work,  an 
examination  of  the  Vulgate  will  reveal  this  general  design 
running  all  through  it.  Thus,  at  times,  he  changes  com- 
pletely the  order  and  form  of  the  Hebrew  sentence ;  again, 
he  avoids  the  excessive  minuteness  of  description  and  fre- 
quent repetitions  of  the  same  text.  The  following  two 
examples  will  illustrate  this : 


Genesis  XXXIX.  19-20. 
(Literal  Hebrew.) 

"And  it  came  to  pass,  when 
his  master  heard  the  words  of 
his  wife,  which  she  spake  unto 
him,  saying:  After  this  manner 
did  thy  servant  to  me ;  that  his 
wrath  was  kindled.  And  Jos- 
eph's master  took  him,  and  put 
him  into  the  prison,  a  place 
where  the  King's  prisoners  were 
bound:  and  he  was  there  in  the 
prison. " 

Exodus  XL.  12-15.  (He- 
brew.) 

' '  An^  thou  shalt  bring  Aaron 
and  his  sons  unto  the  door  of 
the  tabernacle  of  the  covenant, 
and  wash  them  with  water. 
And  thou  shalt  put  upon  Aaron 
the  holy  garments,  and  anoint 
him,  and  sanctify  him,  that  he 
may  minister  unto  me  in  the 


Genesis  XXXIX.  19-20 
(Vulgate.) 

"His  master  hearing  these 
things,  and  giving  too  much 
credit  to  his  wife's  words,  was 
very  angry,  and  cast  Joseph 
into  the  prison,  where  the 
King's  prisoners  were  kept, 
and  he  was  there  shut  up. " 


Exodus  XL.  12-13.  (Vul- 
gate.) 

"And  thou  shalt  bring  Aaron 
and  his  sons  to  the  door  of  the 
tabernacle  of  the  covenant,  and 
having  washed  them  with 
water,  thou  shalt  put  on  them 
the  holy  vestments,  that  they 
may  minister  to  me,  and  that 
the  unction  of  them  may  pros- 


728  THE   VULGATE 

priest's  office.  And  thou  shalt  per  to  an  everlasting  priest- 
bring  his  sons,  and  clothe  them  hood. " 
with  coats:  And  thou  shalt 
anoint  them,  as  thou  didst 
anoint  their  father,  that  they 
may  minister  unto  me  in  the 
priest's  office:  for  their  anoint- 
ing shall  surely  be  an  everlast- 
ing priesthood  throughout  their 
generations. " 

Jerome  omits  two  whole  verses,  and  condenses  their 
import  in  the  other  two. 

This  is  praised  by  some  as  a  certain  elegance  in  Latin 
diction,  but  I  must  confess  I  prefer  the  quaint  simplicity 
of  the  old  text  with  no  abridgment. 

At  times  Jerome  has  failed  to  apprehend  the  sense  of  the 
Hebrew.     The  following  is  a  notable  example : 

Gen.  XLIX.    22.   (Hebrew.)  Gen.  XLIX.    22.    (Vulgate.) 

"Joseph    is    a    fruitful    son  "Joseph  is  a  growing  son,  a 

(bough),  a  fruitful  son  (plant-  growing    son    and    comely    to 

ed)    by    the    fountain     whose  behold:  the  daughters  run  to 

branches  run  over  the  wall."  and  fro  upon  the  wall." 

It  is  evident  that  the  holy  text  likens  Joseph  to  a  vine 
planted  in  well  irrigated  soil;  and  Joseph's  prosperity  is 
likened  to  the  healthy  growth  of  this  vine  which  sends  forth 
its  shoots  over  the  wall.  It  is  easy  to  see  that  this  is  more 
congruous  to  the  grave  sense  of  Scripture,  than  the  picture  of 
maidens  running  about  on  an  eminence  to  see  the  beautiful 
Joseph. 

Again  when  Jerome  essays  to  translate  proper  names  into 
their  supposed  signification,  he  sometimes  errs. 

The  following  text  will  illustrate  this  assertion :       * 

Joshua    XIV.  15.  (Hebrew.)  Joshua  XIV.  15.  (Vulgate.) 

"And  the  name  of  Hebron  " The  name  of  Hebron  before 

before  was  Kiriath-Arba   (the  was       called        Cariath-Arbe ; 

city  of  Arba)  who  was  a  great  Adam,  the  greatest  among  the 

man  among  the  Anakim.     And  Enacim  was  laid  there ;  and  the 

the  land  had  rest  from  war.  "  land  rested  from  wars.  " 


THE   VULGATE  729 

The  sense  is  simply  that  Hebron  was  called  the  city  of 
Arba,  who  had  been  a  great  hero  of  the  Anakim.  How  far 
Jerome  has  departed  from  this  sense  we  leave  the  reader  to 
judge.     Again : 

H.    Ezra  IX.  7.    (Vulgate.)  11.    Ezra   IX.    7.    (Hebrew.) 

"Thou,  O  Lord  God,  art  he  "Thou    art   the    Lord   God, 

who     chosest      Abram,      and  who  didst  choose  Abram,  and 

broughtest  him  forth  out  of  the  broughtest  him  forth  out  of  Ur, 

fire  of  the  Chaldeans,  and  gav-  of   the   Chaldeans,  and   gavest 

est  him  the  name  of  Abraham. "  him  the  name  of  Abraham. ' ' 

It  is  plain  that  the  inspired  text  wishes  to  state,  that 
Abram  was  called  by  God  out  of  the  Chaldean  city  Ur. 
Jerome's  love  for  Hebrew  led  him  to  accept  much  from  the 
Rabbis,  and  here  they  have  deceived  him. 

Sometimes,  in  things  relating  to  the  substantial  sense, 
he  has  failed  to  catch  the  meaning.  An  example  of  this  is 
the  following  passage : 

Exodus  XXIII.  13.    (Literal  Exodus    XXIII.   13.     (Vul- 

Hebrew.)  gate.) 

"And   in   all   things   that   I  "  Keep  all  things  that  I  have 

have  said  unto  you,  be  circum-  said  to  you.     And  by  the  name 

spect:  and  make  no  mention  of  of  strange  gods  thou  shalt  not 

the  name  of  other  gods,  neither  swear,  neither  shall  it  be  heard 

let  it  be   heard  out    of   your  out  of  your  mouth. " 
mouth." 

The  precept  is  against  idolatry,  not  against  profanity. 

A  similar  serious  defect  occurs  in  the  well-known  passage 
of  Isaiah  XI.  lo,  wherein  Jerome  translates  the  close  of  the 
verse:  ** — and  his  peace  will  be  glorious,  "  by" — -and  his 
sepulchre  will  be  glorious. "  The  Prophet  predicted  the 
glorious  reign  of  Christ,  which  succeeded  to  his  period  of 
suffering,  and  not,  as  the  Vulgate  leads  some  to  believe,  the 
honor  that  is  paid  to  the  Holy  Sepulchre. 

Although  these  and  certain  other  such  defects  occur  in 
the  Vulgate  of  Jerome,  it  remains,  in  the  main,  the  best  of  all 


730  THE  VULGATE 

the  versions  of  Scripture.  This  is  even  admitted  by  ration- 
alists and  protestants.* 

A  translator  is  not  an  inspired  agent,  and  these  few 
defects  simply  show  that  the  translation  was  a  human  work. 
The  world  has  been  studying  languages,  studying  the  Scrip- 
tures, thinking,  and  writing  for  a  decade  and  a  half  of  cen- 
turies since  Jerome  lived,  and  it  is  not  strange  that  in  a  few 
cases  some  slight  betterment  could  be  now  wrought  in  his 
translation,  but  considering  the  time  and  circumstances  in 
which  it  was  done,  the  translation  of  Jerome  must  ever 
remain  one  of  the  great  works  of  man. 

The  labors  of  Jerome  met  with  much  opposition,  both 
during  his  life  and  after  his  death.  Jerome's  character  was 
one  to  antagonize  a  certain  element  of  mankind.  He  was  a 
man  of  power,  high-minded,  noble,  intolerant  of  baseness 
and  pettiness.  By  his  talents  he  had  outstripped  his  fellows , 
and  then  had  to  look  down  upon  the  envy  of  those  of  a  lower 
plane.  His  prefaces  to  the  several  books,  and  his  letters  to 
friends,  show  that  he  was  not  of  a  temper  of  mind  to  concil- 
iate his  opponents  by  bland  words. 

These  opponents  decried  Jerome  and  his  work  on  the  plea 
that  he  was  attacking  the  Septuagint,  which  had  been  prac- 
tically adopted  by  the  Church.  But  there  was  another 
element  in  the  opposition,  composed  of  good  men,  who, 
actuated  by  zeal  for  the  Church,  feared  that  the  people 
would  be  scandalized  by  this  new  presentation  of  the  truths 
of  Scripture,  with  which,  in  the  old  form,  they  were  now 
familiar.     St.  Augustine  was  of  this  number,  but  towards 

* Haevernick  Einl.  I.  p.  444:  "Seine  im  Ganzen  sehr  wahren  hermen- 
eutischen  Principien  .  .  .  Machen  seine  Arbeit  zu  einer  der  ausgezeichnet- 
sten  Leistungen  des  kirchl.  Alterthums."  Keil  Einl.  p.  572:  "Seine 
Uebersetzung  .  .  .  iibertrifit  alle  alten  Versionen  an  Genauigkeit  und 
Treue."  Uti  "orthodoxi, "  ita  rationalistse  quoque,  inter  quos  De  Wette- 
Schrader  Einl.  p.  137:  "Vermoege  seiner  Sorgfalt  .  .  .  brachte  er 
vieleicht  das  Vortrefflichste  tax  Stande,  was  in  dieser  Artdasganze  Alterthum 
aufzuweisen  hat."  Bleek-Wellhausen  Einl.  p.  598:  "Die  Arbeit  im  Gan- 
zen ist  von  unbefangenen  Richtern  allezeit  als  sehr  gelungen  anerkannt." 
Distel  Gesch.  des  A.  T.  p.  93:  " Unmittelbar  aus  dem  Hebr.  Text  ge- 
schoepft,  meist  in  moegliclist  gewandter  Sprache,  mehr  auf  die  Wieder- 
gabe  des  rechten  Sinnes  als  auf  sklavische  Woertlichkeit  gerichtet,  erhielt 
sie  mit  vollem  Reeht  den  Rang  einer  Vulgata,"  etc.    (Apud  Comely,  op.  cit.) 


THE   VULGATE  731 

the  end  of  his  life,  he  was  more  favorably  disposed  to  Jer- 
ome's translation,  which  he  commended  and  used. 

There  was  no  sudden  transition  from  the  old  to  the  new 
version.  It  was  a  gradual  movement,  sustained  by  the 
intrinsic  excellence  of  the  Vulgate. 

The  earliest  and  most  universal  endorsement  of  Jerome's 
translation  came  from  Gaul.  Cassian  (t432),  during  Jer- 
ome's life,  called  it  the  more  correct  edition.  Soon  after  his 
death,  Eucherius  of  Lyon  (t454),  Vincent  of  Lerins  (t45o), 
Prosper  (t45o),  Sedulius  (t45o),  Avitus  (t532),  and  Caes- 
arius  of  Aries  (t542)  adopted  it  as  the  received  text  of  Scrip- 
ture. 

At  Rome,  during  the  fifth  and  sixth  centuries,  the  drift 
was  decidedly  in  favor  of  the  Vetus  Itala.  against  the  Vul- 
gate. St.  Leo  the  Great  (440-461)  and  Pope  Hilary  (461- 
468)  made  some  use  of  the  Vulgate.  With  John  III.  (560- 
578)  the  tide  set  in  strongly  towards  the  Vulgate,  and  St. 
Gregory  the  Great  (590-604),  who  considered  the  Vulgate 
the  truer  translation,  is  witness  that  only  small  use  was  made 
in  his  day  of  the  Vetus  Itala.  From  that  time  forth  the 
Vetus  Itala  was  neglected,  and  Jerome's  translation  became, 
in  very  deed,  the  Vulgate.  St.  Isidore  of  Seville  (1636) 
declares  that  Jerome's  translation  ''is  universally  used,  for 
the  reason  that  it  is  truer  in  its  sense,  and  clearer  in  its 
diction."  (De  Off.  I.  12).  Ven.  Bede,  (t735)  made  almost 
exclusive  use  of  the  Vulgate.  Rhabanus  Maurus  and  Wala- 
frid  Strabo  declare,  that  *4n  the  principal  books  the  whole 
Church  of  Rome  uses  the  translation  of  Jerome."  (Instit. 
Cler.  II.  54).  The  ascendancy  of  the  Vulgate  was  accom- 
plished, not  by  any  official  decree,  but  by  the  steady  growth 
of  the  recognition  of  its  excellence. 

The  mode  of  diffusion  of  written  data  of  those  days  made 
them  greatly  liable  to  corruption.  When  a  book  is  printed, 
it  is  fixed  and  unchangeable.  But  in  the  old  days,  when  the 
publishing  of  a  book  was  by  means  of  manuscripts  written 
by  men  who  were  ever  prone,  either  by  ignorance  or  negli- 
gence, to  permit  errors,  or  by  active,  arbitrary  design  to 
insert  certain  judgments  of  their  own  into  the  text,  the  more 
a  book  was  copied  the  more  it  was  corrupted ;  for  it  was  made 


732  THE   VULGATE 

tojreflect  something  of  every  one  through  whose  hands  it 
had  passed.  This  was  augmented,  in  the  case  of  the  Vul- 
gate, by  the  contemporaneous  existence  for  centuries  of  the 
two  Latin  versions.  Passages  were  copied  from  one  into 
the  other.  There  was  much  revision,  and  re -revision,  remo- 
deling, and  sciolism,  till  the  two  texts  were  well  mixed  and 
corrupted.  Hugh  of  St.  Victor,  testifies  of  this  state  as 
follows:  "It  has  come  about  by  a  perverse  usage,  since 
different  ones  follow  different  translations,  that  both  are 
now  so  mixed  that  no  man  knows  what  is  proper  to  each 
text."     (Pat.  Lat.  Migne,  175,  17.) 

Learned  men  arose  in  the  Church  and  strove  to  remedy 
this  evil.  Cassiodorus  emended  the  text  for  his  monks. 
Alcuin,  at  the  bidding  of  Charlemagne,  revised  the  entire 
Latin  version,  and  presented  the  corrected  copy  to  Charle- 
magne in  801.  From  this  text  were  made  the  Bibles  of 
Alcuin,  or  of  Charlemagne,  as  they  are  sometimes  called. 
They  were  much  in  use  up  to  the  thirteenth  century.  Many 
of  the  codices  of  the  Vulgate  are  of  this  recension. 

Other  corrections  were  made  by  St.  Peter  Damian 
(tio72),  St.  Lanfranc  of  Canterbury  (tioSg),  and  the  Cister- 
cian St.  Stephen  (tii34). 

As  the  corruption  was  universal  in  character,  these 
private  efforts  were  inadequate  to  remedy  the  evil.  Hence, 
in  the  thirteenth  century,  theologians  formulated  a  design  for 
an  Apparatus  Criticus,  which  should  serve  as  a  norm  to 
correct  all  texts.  The  data  of  the  Apparatus  Criticus  were 
taken  from  the  old  codices,  from  the  writings  of  the  Fathers, 
from  the  commentaries  of  Jerome,  from  the  Glossary  of 
Strabo,  and  the  interlinear  Glossary  of  Stephen  Langton. 
Some  collation  was  also  made  of  the  original  texts.  The 
results  of  these  labors  were,  in  1226,  embodied  in  the  Cor- 
rectorium  of  Paris. 

This  work  afterwards  received  the  approbation  of  the 
Archbishop  of  Sens,  Primate  of  Gaul,  for  which  cause  it  is 
sometimes  called  the  Correctorium  Senonense.  This  work 
of  the  University  of  Paris  in  nowise  benefitted  the  text. 
It  w^as  simply  the  multiplication  of  a  poor  text,  with  some 
additional    corruption,   so  that   Roger   Bacon   said   of  it: 


THE  CORRECTORIA  OF  THE  VULGATE         733 

*' Textus  pro  ma jori  parte  horribiliter  corruptus  est  .  .  . 
et  ubi  non  habet  comiptionem,  habet  tantam  dubitationem 
qu2e  merit o  cadit  in  omnem  Sapientem. "  (Apud  Hody, 
De  Text.  Orig.) 

The  method  employed  by  those  who  wrought  the  Cor- 
rectoria  of  the  thirteenth  century  was  to  note  down  on  the 
margin  of  a  manuscript  copy  of  the  text  the  judgments  con- 
cerning individual  passages.  Hence,  we  find  in  the  margin: 
"est  de  textu, "  "non  est  de  textu, "  "vera  est  lit  era, " 
"falsa  est  litera,"  etc.  Sometimes,  also,  the  margins  con- 
tain different  readings  from  other  manuscripts.  The  critical 
worth  of  these  Correctoria  is  to  us  considerable. 

The  Dominican  Chapter  of  France  in  1256,  condemned 
the  Correctorium  of  Sens,  and  proscribed  its  use  in  the  Order. 

Some  efforts  had  been  made  by  the  Dominicans  to  have  a 
corrected  and  uniform  text,  and  the  first  work  worthy  of  note 
was  executed  by  Hugh  de  St.  Cher,  general  of  the  Order. 
As  Hugh  knew  Hebrew,  he  essayed  to  remove  all  glosses 
from  the  Vulgate,  and  restore  it  to  its  pristine  state.  He 
made  no  use  of  old  MSS,  but  corrected  it  according  to  the 
Hebrew  and  Greek.  It  is  more  a  second  translation  than  a 
critical  recension  of  the  Vulgate. 

There  were  some  other  minor  Correctoria  executed  by 
the  Dominicans,  of  which  but  little  is  known.  Albertus  Mag- 
nus, St.  Thomas,  and  other  theologians  employed  the  texts 
of  Scripture  as  found  in  the  Correctorium  of  the  Dominicans. 
Although  great  erudition  and  labor  was  expended  on  this 
work,  it  failed  through  a  defective  critique.  They  had,  in  a 
measure,  substituted  their  work  for  the  work  of  Jerome,  and 
Jerome's  work  was  the  better.  They  had  also  placed  in  the 
margin  many  readings  judged  to  be  erroneous,  underlining 
them  in  red,  or  affixing  to  them  some  other  sign,  that  readers 
might  be  warned  against  them.  In  time  the  indications 
were  unobserved,  and  the  readings  crept  into  the  text. 
Roger  Bacon,  said  of  this  text:  "Eorum  correctio  est 
pessima  corruptio,  et  destruitur  textus  Dei ;  et  longe  minus 
malum  est  uti  exemplari  Parisiensi  non  correcto  quam 
eorum  correctione. "     (Apud  Hody,  1.  c.) 


734         THE  CORRECTORIA  OF  THE  VULGATE 

The  Correctorium  of  the  Franciscans  has  been  erron- 
eously termed  the  Correctorium  of  the  Sorbonne,  from  the 
fact  that  it  became  known  from  a  manuscript  of  the  Sor- 
bonne, which  is  at  present  in  the  National  Library  in  Paris 
(Latin  15554).  Its  method  was  similar  to  that  of  the 
Dominicans,  but  of  its  value  little  is  known.  The  Correct- 
orium of  the  Vatican,  so  called  from  its  MS  in  the  Vatican, 
was  executed  about  the  beginning  of  the  fourteenth  century 
by  William  de  Mara,  a  Franciscan  of  Oxford.  The  man  was 
a  disciple  of  Bacon,  and  his  work  shows  much  erudition  and 
critique.  He  made  use  of  Hebrew  and  Greek,  not  to  sup- 
plant the  version  of  Jerome,  but  to  perfect  it.  His  Correct- 
orium is  the  best  of  all.  He  fails  sometimes,  especially  in 
Greek,  of  which  he  knew  less  than  of  Hebrew. 

Many  other  Correctoria  existed  which  merit  no  mention 
here. 

We  insert  here  some  mention  of  a  few  of  the  principal 
manuscripts  of  the  Vulgate. 

Chief  among  these  is  the  Codex  Amiatinus. 

This  manuscript,  the  most  celebrated,  if  not  the  oldest  of 
the  Vulgate  of  Jerome,  belongs  to  the  Laurentian  Library  at 
Florence.  It  is  registered  Amiatinus  I.,  because  it  is  one  of 
the  manuscripts,  which  were  brought  from  the  Abbey  of 
Mount  Amiato,  near  Sienna,  to  the  aforesaid  monastery,  at 
the  time  of  the  Abbey's  suppression  in  1786.  The  script  is 
the  uncial  lettering  of  Italian  caligraphy.  The  parchment 
is  divided  in  cahiers  of  sixteen  pages  each.  Every  page 
has  two  columns  of  text,  and  each  column  forty-four  lines. 
The  whole  width  of  the  initial  letters  of  the  verses  or  stichs  is 
displayed  on  the  margin  of  the  MS.  There  is  no  punctua- 
tion. The  text  is  divided  into  stichs.  It  has  no  adorned 
initials,  such  as  the  beautiful  ones  we  see  in  the  manuscripts 
of  the  Carlovingian  epoch.  Its  height  is  fifty  centimeters, 
its  width  thirty-four.  The  manuscript  forms  only  one 
volume  of  one  thousand  and  twenty-nine  leaves.  It  con- 
tains the  whole  text  of  the  Vulgate,  every  book  prefaced  by 
an  introduction  or  prologue  by  St.  Jerome. 

On  the  back  of  the  first  page  of  the  manuscript  is  read  the 
following  inscription  in  verse : 


CHIEF   MANUSCRIPTS   OF   THE   VULGATE  735 

"Coenobium  ad  eximii  merit o  venerabile  Salvatoris, 
Quern  caput  Ecclesiae  dedicat  alta  fides, 
Petrus  Langobardorum  extremis  de  finib.  abbas 
Devoti  affectus  pignora  mitto  mei, 
Meque  meos  optans  tanti  inter  gaudia  patris 
In  coelis  memorem  semper  habere  locum.  " 
The  Abbot  Peter  is  unknown.     The  expression,  head  of 
the  Church,  applied  to  the  monastery  of  Mt.  Amiato  is  very- 
strange  .     Moreover,  the  words  '  *  Coenobium , "  *  *  Salvatoris , ' ' 
and    ** Petrus    Langobardorum"    are   words   written  by  a 
second  hand  upon  an  erasure.     Evidently  the  dedication  of 
the  manuscript  was  defaced  at  the  time  of  the  change  of 
ownership.     The  question  has  engaged  many  to  ascertain 
for  whom  the  manuscript  was  originally  intended.     Bandini 
of  the  last  century,  in  drawing  up  a  catalogue  of  the  Lauren- 
tian  manuscripts,  proposed  to  correct  the  first  verse  as  fol- 
lows:  *'Culmen  ad  eximii  merito  venerabile  Petri."     The 
hexameter  is  restored  at  the  same  time,  and  the  first  verse  is 
made  to  agree  with  the  second:    "Quem  caput    Ecclesiae 
dedicat  alta  fides. " 

Thus  it  would  result  that  the  manuscript  were  one  offered 
to  the  Roman  Church,  Caput  Ecclesice.  For  the  ''Petrus 
Langobardorum,"  Bandini  proposed  to  substitute  ''Ser- 
vandus  Latii.''  In  fact,  at  the  beginning  of  Leviticus,  we 
read  the  name  of  such  copyist,  who  labored  at  the  production 
of  the  manuscript.  We  know  of  an  Abbot  Servandus  of  the 
sixth  century,  a  friend  of  St.  Benedict  of  the  neighbgrhood 
of  Alatri,  on  the  boundaries  of  Latium.  The  Codex  Amia- 
tinus  was  thus  considered  a  manuscript  of  the  sixth  century, 
of  Italian  origin :  it  has  been  accepted  as  such  by  Tischendorf . 
The  finding  of  the  authentic  original,  and  the  age  of  the 
Codex  Amiatinus,  is  one  of  the  most  brilliant  discoveries  of 
M.  de  Rossi.  In  a  memoir  on  the  sources  of  the  library  of 
the  Holy  See,  published  in  1886,  which  memoir  is  used  as  a 
preface  to  the  catalogues  of  the  Vatican  library,  he  relates 
how  in  the  seventh  or  eighth  century,  the  bishops  and  the 
abbots  outside  of  Italy  desired  much  to  receive  manuscripts 
from  the  Popes,  so  that  Pope  Martin  (649-653)  could  write: 
"Codices  jam  exinaniti  sunt  a  nostra  bibliotheca,  unde  ei 


736  CHIEF   MANUSCRIPTS    OF   THE   VULGATE 

(the  carrier  of  the  letter)  dare  nullatenus  habuimus ;  trans- 
cribere  autem  non  potuit,  quoniam  festinanter  de  hac  civi- 
tate  egredi  properavit. " 

Bendict  Biscop,  the  founder  of  the  Abbeys  of  Wear- 
mouth  and  Yarrow,  was  one  of  those  prelates  of  the  seventh 
century,  devout  to  the  things  and  books  of  Rome.  Five 
times  (in  653,  658,  671,  678  and  in  684),  he  made  pilgrimages 
to  Rome,  bringing  back  every  time,  according  to  Bede's 
testimony,  "  innumerabilem  librorum  omnis  generis  cop- 
iam. "  At  his  death  he  left  to  his  two  Abbeys  **bibliothe- 
cam  quam  de  Roma  nobilissimam  copiosissimamque  advex- 
erat. " 

His  successor  was  Ceolfrid,  who  was  the  master  of  Bede, 
of  whom  Bede  tells  us,  that  he  took  a  great  care  of  Benedict 
Biscop 's  library,  and  had  three  manuscripts  of  the  Holy 
Scripture  executed  according  to  a  copy  brought  from  Rome, 
and  that  he  gave  a  copy  to  each  of  his  two  Abbeys,  Wear- 
mouth  and  Yarrow,  and  then,  when  he  started  for  Rome, 
he  took  the  third  copy,  in  order  to  offer  it  to  the  Holy  See. 
Ceolfrid  died  on  the  way,  at  Langres,  Sept.  25,  716.  But  the 
monks,  who  accompanied  him,  proceeded  towards  the  Eter- 
nal City,  and  it  is  to  be  supposed  that  they  accomphshed 
their  Abbot's  intentions,  thus  expressed  by  Bede:  "Inter 
alia  donaria  quse  afiEerre  disposuerat  misit  Ecclesise  sancti 
Petri  pandectem  a  Beato  Hieronymo  in  Latinum  ex  Hebrseo 
vel  Grieco  fonte  translatum. " 

M.  de  Rossi  based  a  conjecture  upon  those  facts,  that  we 
should  read  in  the  dedicatory  of  the  Codex  Amiatinus, 
neither  *' Petrus  Langobardorum'*  nor  '' Servandus  Latii/' 
but  ''Ceolfrtdus  Britonum.'"  The  two  words  proposed  by 
M.  de  Rossi  fitted  exactly  the  place  of  the  erasure.  The 
poetical  quantity  only  was  still  defective.  M.  Samuel 
Berger  proposed  ''  Ceolfridus  Anglorum."  While  the  Eng- 
lish reviewers  were  theorizing  for  and  against  this  conjec- 
ture, which  brought  down  to  the  eighth  century  the  most 
important  manuscript  of  Jerome's  Vulgate,  and  made  of  it 
an  Anglo-Saxon  work.  M.  Hort  pointed  out  in  an  anony- 
mous Life  of  Ceolfrid,  very  likely  Bede's  work,  published  for 
the  first  time  in  1841,  a  passage  in  which  it  is  related,  in  the 


CHIEF   MANUSCRIPTS   OF   THE   VULGATE  737 

same  terms  as  above,  how  Ceolfrid  had  made  three  copies  of 
the  Roman  Bible  in  his  possession ;  that  he  intended  to  offer 
one  of  those  three  copies  to  the  Church  of  St.  Peter  at  Rome ; 
that  he  died  during  his  pilgrimage;  and  that  the  Bible 
destined  for  St.  Peter's  bore  the  following  verses : 

' '  Corpus  ad  exitnii  merito  venerabile  Petri 
Dedicat  Ecclesiae  quern  caput  alta  fides, 
Ceolfridus,  Anglorum  extimis  de  finibus  abbas, 
Devoti  affectus  pignora  mitto  mei, "  etc. 

We  could  not  wish  for  a  conjecture  a  more  perfect  verifi- 
cation. The  Codex  Amiatinus,  therefore,  was  executed 
between  690,  date  of  Benedict  Biscop's  death,  and  716,  and 
rather  about  690  than  towards  716,  in  Northumberland, 
either  at  Yarrow,  or  at  Wearmouth,  and  it  is  the  copy  of  a 
manuscript  of  Jerome's  Vulgate  brought  from  Rome. 

The  Codex  Amiatinus  is  at  present  held  to  represent  the 
most  ancient  condition  of  Jerome's  Vulgate,  that  is  to  say, 
it  approaches  closest  to  the  text  executed  by  Jerome.  It 
played  a  considerable  part  in  the  history  of  the  Vulgate  in 
the  middle  age. 

"It  is  from  Northumberland  that  the  good  texts  of  the 
Vulgate  have  been  spread,  not  only  in  Italy,  to  whom  Eng- 
land paid  thus  its  debt,  but  moreover,  in  France,  for  Alcuin 
came  from  York  and  was  selected  by  Charles  the  Great 
(Charlemagne),  for  correcting  the  text  of  the  Bible." — 
Samuel  Berger,  De  1'  Histoire  de  la  Vulgate  en  France, 
Paris,  1887,  p.  4. 

Tischendorf  published  the  text  of  the  New  Testament  of 
the  Codex  Amiatinus,  C.  Tischendorf,  Novum  Testamentum 
ex  Codice  Amiatino,  Leipzig,  1 890-1 894.  See  Bandini, 
Bibliotheca  Leopoldina  Laurentiana,  Florence,  1891.  t.  I., 
p.  701-732;  Wordsworth,  Novum  Testamentum  Latine,  p. 
XI.,  Oxford,  1889;  De  Rossi,  La  Biblia  offerta  da  Ceolfrido 
abbate  al  sepulcro  di  S.  Pietro,  Rome,  1888;  J.  White, 
The  Codex  Amiatinus  and  its  birthplace  in  the  Studia 
Biblica,  Oxford,  1870,  t.  11,  p.  273-308.  (P.  Batiffol  in 
Dictionnaire  de  la  Bible.) 

The  next  great  Codex  of  the  Vulgate  is  the  Codex  Ful- 
DENSis.     It  contains  only  the  entire  New  Testament,  and 

47  (H-S.) 


738  CHIEF  MANUSCRIPTS    OF   THE   VULGATE 

can  not  be  made  equal  to  Codex  Amiatinus.  Its  colophon 
declares  that  it  was  made  under  the  supervision  of  Victor, 
Bishop  of  Capua.  Victor  ascended  the  episcopal  throne  in 
541.  From  the  Roman  dates  afhxed  to  the  instrument, 
chronographers  establish  that  it  was  finished  in  546. 

St.  Boniface,  the  Apostle  of  Germany,  is  believed  to  have 
carried  the  Codex  into  Germany,  and  it  is  not  improbable 
that  he  had  the  Codex  with  him  when  he  was  martyred  in 
Frisia  in  755. 

The  Codex  bears  certain  explanatory  notes  from  the 
hand  of  Boniface. 

It  is  preserved  at  Fulda.  It  has  been  published  and 
accurately  described  by  E.  Reinke,  Marbourg,  1868. 

The  Codex  Toletanus  contains  all  the  books  of  both 
Testaments,  except  Baruch.  It  is  written  in  Gothic  capital 
characters,  hence  it  is  sometimes  called  the  Gothic  Codex. 
It  was  used  in  the  Sixtine  and  Clementine  correction  of  the 
Vulgate.  Its  date  is  placed  in  the  eighth  century.  It  is  the 
present  property  of  the  Metropolitan  Church  of  Toledo. 

The  Codex  Cavensis  is  a  MS  of  Jerome's  Vulgate,  the 
property  of  the  Abbey  of  La  Cava,  near  Salerno.  It  con- 
sists of  303  leaves,  in  three  columns  of  54  and  55  lines.  The 
titles  and  prologues  are  in  uncial  characters ;  the  body  of  the 
text  is  in  minuscule  Roman  characters.  M.  Berger  advances 
the  theory  that  the  Codex  is  a  production  of  the  Visigoths  of 
Spain,  in  the  ninth  century,  if  not  of  the  end  of  the  eighth. 
It  contains  all  the  books  of  both  Testaments. 

The  Codex  Foroiuliensis  of  the  sixth  century,  formerly 
contained  the  four  Gospels,  but  now  is  mutilated  in  Mark. 

The  Codex  Ottobonianus  contains  the  Octateuch  com- 
plete. 

The  Codex  Paulinus  or  Carolinus,  and  The  Codex 
Statianus  or  Vallicellianus  of  the  ninth  century,  contain 
all  the  books  of  both  Testaments  of  the  recension  of  Alcuin. 
They  were  much  prized  by  Sirleti  and  others  in  the  emenda- 
tion of  the  Vulgate. 

After  the  invention  of  printing  in  the  fifteenth  century, 
the  first  book  ever  printed  was  the  Vulgate  printed  at  Mainz, 
in  1450.     From  that  time  up  to  the  close  of  the  century, 


THE   AUTHORIZATION   OF   THE   VULGATE  739 

great  activity  was  exercised  in  the  printing  of  the  Latin 
Vulgate,  and  more  than  a  hundred  different  editions  were 
printed  in  that  period. 

But  little  critical  care  was  bestowed  on  these  early  edi- 
tions, and  the  best  MSS  were  not  employed,  so  that  they  are 
of  no  critical  worth. 

The  Dominican  Castellanus  issued  an  edition  at  Venice  in 
1506,  in  which  he  printed  some  marginal  readings,  collected 
principally  from  other  printed  editions.  The  first  real  criti- 
cal edition  of  the  Vulgate  text  was  the  Complutensian, 
whose  text  was  excellent  for  that  time. 

After  the  rise  of  protestantism,  the  protestants  threw  off 
all  reverence  for  the  Vulgate.  They  changed  its  readings  at 
will,  and  made  for  themselves  new  editions  from  the  original 
texts. 

The  Dominican  Sanctes  Pagninus  (ti54i)  and  Cajetan 
made  new  Latin  versions.  Augustine  Steuchus,  and  Isidore 
Clarius,  revised  the  text  of  the  Vulgate  in  conformity  with 
the  original  texts.  Hittorp  endeavored,  in  his  edition  of 
Cologne  in  1530,  to  restore  the  text  of  Jerome  to  its  original 
purity. 

Robert  Etienne  collected  at  Paris  a  considerable  number 
of  codices  and  spent  upwards  of  twenty  years,  from  1528  to 
1 548  and  beyond,  in  emending  the  text  of  the  Vulgate.  His 
labors  w^ere  profitable  to  the  study  of  the  text,  but  he 
unwisely  inserted  certain  of  Calvin's  annotations  in  some  of 
his  editions,  and  drew  upon  his  work  the  censure  of  the 
University  of  Paris.  The  best  of  Etienne 's  editions  is  that 
of  1540,  and  the  faculty  were  unwise  in  extending  their  cen- 
sure to  this  excellent  text,  wherein  was  naught  of  Calvinism 
or  other  error. 

Chapter  XXIV. 
The  Authorization  of  the  Vulgate  by  the  Council 

OF  Trent. 

On  the  17th  of  March,  1546,  in  the  general  session,  the 
Fathers  who  had  been  charged  to  investigate  the  status  of 
the  Latin  text  of  Scripture  reported  four  abuses.  Only  the 
first  two  are  relevant  to  our  present  theme. 


740  THE   AUTHORIZATION   OF  THE  VULGATE 

The  first  abuse  was  the  existence  of  many  Latin  versions 
of  the  Scriptures,  which  were  used  as  authentic  in  public 
readings,  disputations,  and  discourses.  The  remedy  sug- 
gested was  to  have  the  old  Vulgate  as  the  sole  authentic 
edition  which  all  should  use  as  authentic  in  all  public  read- 
ing, and  in  the  exposition  and  preaching  of  Holy  Scripture ; 
and  that  no  one  should  reject  it  or  impugn  its  truth ;  and  not 
thereby  to  detract  aught  from  the  genuine  and  true  version 
of  the  Seventy  Interpreters,  which  the  Apostles  sometimes 
used,  nor  to  reject  other  editions  which  help  to  find  the 
source  of  the  authentic  Vulgate. 

The  second  abuse  was  the  corruption  of  the  codices  of  the 
Vulgate. 

The  remedy  was  to  expurgate  and  amend  the  codices  and 
restore  to  the  Christian  world  the  genuine  text  of  the  Vulgate, 
free  from  error.  And  the  Fathers  petitioned  the  Pope  to 
cause  this  great  work  to  be  done  and  also  to  bring  it  about 
that  the  Church'of  God^might  also  have  a  correct  Greek  and 
Hebrew  text.* 

Several  particular  assemblies  and  three  general  sessions 
discussed  this  proposition,  and  finally,  the  Council  promul- 
gated its  famous  decree. 

H^^The  same  thrice  holy  Synod,  believing  that  much  bene- 
fit may  accrue  to  the  Church  of  God,  if  from  among  all  the 
Latin  versions  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  which  are  in  circula- 
tion, an  authentic  one  be  recognized,  decrees  and  declares 

*" Primus  abusus  est:  habere  varias  editiones  S.  Scrip turae,  et  illis  velle 
uti  pro  authenticis  in  publicis  lectionibus  et  praedicationibus.  Remedium 
est:  habere  unam  tantam  editionem,  veterem  scilicet  et  Vulgatam,  qua 
omnes  utantur  pro  authentica  in  publicis  lectionibus,  expositionibus  et 
praedicationibus,  et  quod  nemo  illam  reiicere  audeat  aut  illi  contradicere  ; 
non  detrahendo  tamen  auctoritati  purae  et  veras  interpretationis  Septua- 
ginta  interpretum,  qua  nonnunquam  usi  sunt  Apostoli,  neque  reiiciendo 
alias  editiones,  quatenus  authenticae  illius  Vulgatae  intelligentiam  iuvant . 
— Secundus  abusus  est  corruptio  codicum  qui  circumferuntur  Vulgatae 
huius  editionis.  Remedium  est,  ut  expurgatis  et  emendatis  codicibus 
restituatur  christiano  orbi  pura  et  sincera  Vulgata  editio  a  mendis  libro- 
rum,  qui  circumferuntur.  Id  autem  munus  erit  Smi.  D.  N.,  quem  S.  Syno- 
dus  htuniliter  exorabit,  ut  pro  ovibus  Christi  Suae  Beatitudini  creditis  hoc 
onus  ingentis  fructus  et  glorias  sui  ipsius  animi  magnitudine  dignum  susci- 
piat;  ctirando  etiam,  ut  unum  codicem  Graecum  unumque  Hebrasum, 
quoad  fieri  potest,  correctum  habeat  Ecclesia  sancta  Dei. " 


THE   AUTHORIZATION   OF   THE   VULGATE  741 

that  the  old  edition  of  the  Vulgate,  which  has  been  approved 
by  the  Church  by  the  usage  of  so  many  centuries,  shall  be 
held  authentic  in  all  public  readings,  disputations,  and  in  the 
public  exposition  and  preaching  of  Scripture,  and  that  no 

man  may  reject  it  upon  whatever  pretext And 

having  in  mind  to  establish  also  a  rule  for  printers     .     .     . 
the  Council  decrees  and  establishes  that,  hereafter,  the  Holy 
Scripture,  especially  this  old  Vulgate,  shall  be  most  carefully 
printed."* 

Some  believe  that  the  Council  of  Trent  established  two 
conditions  that  a  book  be  judged  canonical:  i.  the  fact  that 
it  had  been  read  in  the  church, — ''  prouti  in  Ecclesia  Cath- 
olica  legi  consueverunt;''  2.  its  presence  in  the  Vulgate — 
'' et  in  Veteri  Vulgata  Editione  habentur.  Thus  they  judge 
that  the  mere  presence  of  a  book  in  the  Vulgate  edition  is 
not  sufficient;  but  there  must  be  present  the  constant 
reading  in  the  Church. 

This  seems  to  us  unfounded.  The  Council  did  not  con- 
template a  possible  discrepancy  between  the  Vulgate  and 
the  Church's  traditional  use  of  Scripture.  In  fact  the  reason 
of  the  Vulgate's  authority  is  the  fact  that  it  was  constantly 
read  in  the  Church.  The  test  of  Canonicity  is  one,  that  is 
the  constant  reading  of  all  the  books  in  the  Church's  text 
of  Scripture.  The  presence  of  the  books  in  the  Vulgate  is 
not  a  second  condition  but  an  explanation  of  the  first.  The 
Vulgate  is  the  concrete  expression  of  the  constant  use  of  the 
Church.  This  is  clear  from  the  Acts  of  the  Council  wherein 
we  find  that  the  clause  concerning  the  Vulgate  was  added 
simply  to  determine  what  was  the  Church's  use  of  Scripture. 

What  the  Council  of  Trent  decreed  for  the  Vulgate  could 
have  been  decreed  of  the  Old  Latin  Version. 

*"Eadem  sacrosancta  Synodus  considerans  non  parum  utilitatis 
accedere  posse  Ecclesias  Dei,  si  ex  omnibus  latinis  editionibus,  quae  cir- 
cumferuntur,  sacrorum  librorum,  quaenam  pro  authentica  habenda  sit 
innotescat,  statuit  et  declarat,  ut  haec  ipsa  vetus  et  Vulgata  editio,  quae 
longo  tot  saeculorum  usu  in  ipsa  Ecclesia  probata  est,  in  publicis  lection- 
ibus,  disputationibus,  praedicationibus  et  expositionibus,  pro  authentica 
habeatur  et  ut  nemo  illam  reiicere  quovis  praetextu  audeat  vel  praesiunat. 
.  Sed  et  impressoribus  modum  in  hac  parte,  ut  par  est.  imponere 
volens,  .     ,     decemit  et  statuit,  ut  posthac  S.  Scriptura,  potissimiun 

verohaec  ipsa  vetus  et  Vulgata  editio  quam  emendatissime  imprimatur." 


742        THE  AUTHORIZATION  OF  THE  VULGATE 

The  decree  of  the  Council  of  Trent  set  in  motion  a  turbu- 
lent movement  especiall37"  in  Spain.  The  power  was  in  the 
hands  of  those  who  defended  the  absolute  infallibility  and 
absolute  sanction  of  the  Vulgate.  These  by  violence  and 
the  power  of  the  law  prevented  any  expression  of  honest 
thought  which  came  short  of  adoration  of  the  Vulgate. 
Men  were  cast  into  prison  for  attempting  to  explain  the 
legitimate  sense  of  the  great  Council's  decree.  Others, 
through  fear  of  the  Inquisition,  either  adopted  the  views  of 
the  party  in  power  or  kept  a  prudent  silence.  "I  know," 
says  Bannez,  "what  I  would  respond  by  word  of  mouth,  if 
asked  by  the  Church ;  meanwhile,  I  maintain  a  prudent  and 
religious  silence. "     (In  I.  S.  Thom.) 

The  position  of  these  extremists  was  that  the  Council  had 
defined  the  absolute  infallibility  of  the  Vulgate,  even  in  the 
least  details;  that  no  error  of  whatever  nature  was  to  be 
found  in  the  Latin  Vulgate ;  that  since  the  Greek  Schism,  the 
Latin  Church  had  remained  the  sole  depository  of  the  truth, 
and  hence  her  Scriptures  alone  were  authentic,  and  abso- 
lutely authentic.  Of  this  movement  Richard  Simon  truly 
wrote:  "There  were  but  very  few  persons  who  accurately 
comprehended  the  sense  of  the  decree  of  Trent  which  pro- 
nounced the  Vulgate  authentic.  .  .  .  The  greater 
number  of  those  who  agitated  this  question  scarcely  under- 
stood anything  of  it,  and  they  were  moved  more  by  prejudice 
and  passion,  than  by  sense  and  judgment.  "  Periit  judicium 
postquam  res  transiit  in  affectum."     (Hist.  Crit.  du  V.  T. 

11.14.) 

We  find  an  accurate  and  dispassionate  description  of 
these  causes  and  effects  in  the  Disputation  on  the  Vulgate  of 
John  Mariana.*  What  he  has  written  of  Spain,  could  be 
affirmed  in  less  degree  of  other  countries  in  that  period. 

*John  Mariana,  S.  J.  was  bom  in  the  diocese  of  Toledo  in  Spain,  in 
1537.  He  was  endowed  with  great  mental  power  and  uprightness  of  char- 
acter. He  studied  in  the  Complutensian  Academy,  and  in  1554  entered 
the  Society  of  the  Jesuits.  In  1561,  he  came  to  Rome  and  taught  Scrip- 
ture for  four  years.  In  1569,  he  went  to  Paris  and  expounded  the  Summa 
of  St.  Thomas,  in  the  great  Academy  for  five  years.  His  character  was 
honest  and  severe,  and  his  insight  into  truth  profound.  Through  failing 
health  he  was  forced  to  remit  some  of  this  study,  and  in  1574  he  returned 


THE  AUTHORIZATION   OF   THE    VULGATE  743 

''Opus  molestum  suscipimus,  multaque  difficultate 
impeditum,  periculosam  aleam,  ac  qua  nescio  an  uUa  dis- 
putatio  his  superioribus  annis  inter  theologos,  in  Hispania 
pr^sertim,  majori  animorum  ardore  et  motu  agitata  sit^ 
odioque  partium  magis  implacabili,  usque  e5,  ut  a  probris  et 
contumeliis,  quibus  se  mutu5  foedabant,  ad  tribunalia  ven- 
tum  sit;  at  que  quae  pars  sibi  magis  conMebat,  adversaries 
de  Religione  postulates  gravissime  exercuit,  quasi  impios, 
superbos,  arrogantes,  qui  divinorum  librorum  auctoritatem, 
atque  ejus  interpretationis  fidem,  qua  Ecclesia  utitur  passim, 
et  quae  vulgata  editio  nuncupatur,  audacter  elevarent,  no  vis 
interpretationibus  prolatis  invectisque  contra  divinas  leges 
et  humanas,  concilii  Tridentini  decreta  non  itk  pridem  pro- 
mulgata.  Tenuit  ea  causa  multorum  animos  suspenses 
expectatiene,  quem  tandem  exitum  habitura  esset,  cum 
viri  eruditienis  epinione  pr^stantes,  e  vinculis  cogerentur' 
causam  dicere,  baud  levi  salutis  exist imationisque  discrim- 
ine :  miseranda  virtutis  conditio,  quando  pro  laberibus,  ques 
susceperat  maximes,  cempellebantur  eerum  a  quibus  defendi 
par  fuisset,  edia,  accusatienes,  contumelias  tolerare,  quo 
exemplo  multorum  praeclaros  impetus  retardari,  viresque 
debilitari  atque  concidere  necesse  erat.  Omnino  f regit  ea 
res  multorum  animos  alieno  periculo  considerantium,  quan- 
tum precellae  immineret  liber e  affirmantibus  quae  sentirent. 
Itaque  aut  in  aliorum  castra  transibant  frequentes,  aut 
tempori  cedendum  judicabant.  Et  quid  facerent,  cum 
frustrk  niti  neque  fatigando  (ut  ille  ait)  aliud  qukm  odium 
quaerere,  extremae  dementiae  sit?  Plerique  inhaerentes  per- 
suasieni  vulgari,  libenter  in  epinione  perstabant,  iis  placitis 
faventes,  in  quibus  minus  periculi  esset,  baud  magna  veri- 
tatis  cura.  Quidam  enim  editionem  vulgatam  sugillant, 
quasi  multis  vitiis  foedam,  ad  fontes  identidem  prevecantes, 

to  Spain,  and  in  a  studious  retirement  at  Toledo,  he  lived  to  an  extreme 
old  age,  dying  in  1624.  Mariana  was  a  man  of  unblemished  life,  and  intol- 
erant of  evil.  He  was  no  timeserver,  and  attacked  evil  wherever  he  found 
it.  Having  attacked  some  abuses  of  the  State,  in  a  treatise  De  Monetcs 
Mutatione,  he  was  judged  guilty  of  loesce  majestatis,  and  in  his  seventy- 
second  year  was  imprisoned  in  a  Franciscan  monastery.  His  writings 
consist  of  numerous  short  treatises  on  various  subjects,  several  being  on 
the  Scriptures, 


744  THE  AUTHORIZATION   OF    THE   VULGATE 

unde  ad  nos  ii  rivi  manarunt,  ac  contendentes  Graecorum 
Hebraiconimque  codicum  collatione  castigandam  videri, 
quoties  ab  illis  discrepant,  linguarum  peritia  tumidi,  eccles- 
iasticam  simplicitatem  ludibrio  habentes;  quorum  prefect  5 
audacia  ac  temeritas  pronuntiandi  merit 5  fraenanda  est. 
E  contrario,  alii  majori  numero  adversariorum  odio  nefas 
putant  vulgatam  editionem  attrectare,  atque  in  impiorum 
numero  habent,  si  quis  vel  levem  vocem  castigare  tentet, 
si  locum  aliquem  aliter  explicare  contendat,  quam  vulgata 
interpretatio  prae  se  ferat  (quos  imitari  profectb  non  debe- 
mus)  pusillo  homines  animo,  oppleti  tenebris,  angusteque 
sentientes  de  Religionis  nostras  majestate,  qui  dum  opin- 
ionum  castella  pro  fidei  placitis  defendunt,  ipsam  mihi 
arcem  prodere  videntur,  fratemam  charitatem  turpissime 
violantes.  Ergo  extrema  et  devia  vitata,  quas  in  praecipitia 
desinit,  mediam  viam  tenere  constituimus,  qua  fere  in  omni 
disputatione  vitatis  erroribus  ad  veritatem  pervenitur.  " 

The  protestants,  taking  the  statements  of  the  Spanish 
theologians  for  the  position  of  the  Church,  loudly  pro- 
claimed that  the  Council  had  bound  Scriptural  science  with 
chains  of  iron,  and  condemned  it  to  a  sterile  immobility.* 

The  labors  of  Catholic  theologians  in  establishing  the  real 
sense  of  this  decree,  have  removed  the  cause  for  this  calumny, 
and  it  is  only  the  presence  of  a  dense  veil  of  ignorance,  that 
in  our  days  peiTaits  a  repetition  of  this  old  falsehood. 

The  Church  was  not  responsible  for  the  course  of  thought 
in  Spain.  The  best  institutions  of  God  and  man  have  been, 
and  will  be  abused.  The  Council  spoke  the  truth,  and  men, 
in  an  inconsiderate  zeal,  misunderstood  its  words.  Some 
misunderstand  them  yet,  but  the  current  of  thought  in  this 
regard  is  better  now  than  then. 

We  place,  therefore,  as  a  thesis:  That  the  Council  of 
Trent,  in  declaring  the  Vulgate  the  authentic  text  of  Scrip- 

*Cfr.  ex.  gr.  Kiel  Einl.  p.  579 :  "  Mit  diesem  Decret  war  zwar  der  Grund- 
text  nicht  ausdriicklich  verworfen,  aber  doch  fiir  ganz  iiberfliissig  erklart 
und  die  Uebersetzung  kanonisirt  worden."  De  Wette-Schrader  Einl.  p. 
145:  "Was  man  aiich  zur  Milderung  dieses  Decretes  sagen  mag,  immer 
ist  damit  der  exegetischen  Forschung  der  Eingang  in  die  offentliche  Kir- 
chenlehre  verschlossen."  Alii  alio  modo  eadem  repetunt.  (Comely  op. 
cit.; 


THE   AUTHORIZATION    OF   THE    VULGATE  745 

ture,  did  not  place  the  excellence  of  the  Vulgate  above  the 
original  texts  of  Scripture,  nor  above  the  old  versions  of 
Scripture  which  had  been  in  use  in  the  Church,  neither  did 
it  deny  the  authenticity  of  these  texts. 

A  sufficient  argument  for  this  position  is  in  the  very 
words  of  the  decree,  and  in  the  nature  of  the  abuse  which  it 
was  intended  to  remove.  There  was  no  mention  of  original 
texts  or  versions  other  than  the  Latin.  A  mtiltiplicity  of 
Latin  versions  created  confusion,  and  the  Council  chose  one 
Latin  version,  which  should  be  the  official  text  of  Latin 
Scriptures  for  the  Latin  Church.  The  original  texts  and  old 
versions  have  the  same  merit  as  before,  and  are  as  authentic 
as  when  they  formed  the  Scriptural  basis  of  the  decisions  of 
councils,  prior  to  the  Council  of  Trent.  Cardinal  Pole  and 
others  demanded  that  a  text  in  Greek  and  Hebrew  might 
also  be  declared  authentic.  Although  this  was  not  done,  we 
have  every  reason  to  believe  that  it  would  have  been  done 
if  the  need  existed.  In  the  Greek  Church  no  great  variety 
of  translations  existed.  The  Greeks  used  their  authentic 
text,  which  had  been  always  sanctioned  by  the  Church's  use, 
even  before  the  Latin  existed.  No  one  denied  its  authen- 
ticity, and  the  Council  left  it  in  the  peaceful  possession  of 
what  it  always  had.  The  Hebrew  text  was  not  in  use  as  a 
practical  text  of  Scripture  by  any  Christian  Church,  and 
there  was  no  need  to  declare  it  authentic.  It  is  character- 
istic of  the  Catholic  Church  not  to  indulge  in  superfluous 
legislation.  Her  decisions  are  few,  and  framed  to  meet 
actual  needs. 

The  deliberations  of  the  Fathers,  as  related  to  us  by 
Pallavicini  (Storia  del  Cone,  di  Trento),  show  plainly  that 
the  Fathers  wished  to  save  the  credit  of  the  original  texts 
and  the  old  versions :  ''  It  was  the  common  opinion  that  the 
Vulgate  edition  should  be  preferred  to  all  other  (Latin) 
editions ;  but  Pacheco  petitioned  that  these  others  should  be 
also  condemned,  especially  those  made  by  heretics ;  and  he 
extended  this  afterwards  to  the  Septuagint.  Bertram 
opposed  this,  maintaining  that  there  was  always  a  diversity 
of  versions  in  use  with  the  faithful,  which  usage  the  Fathers 
had  approved.     And  who  would  dare,  he  said,  condemn  the 


746  THE   AUTHORIZATION    OF   THE   VULGATE 

translation  of  the  Septuagint  which  the  Church  uses  in  her 
psalmody?  .  .  .  Let  one  version  be  approved,  and  the 
others  be  neither  approved  nor  condemned.  " 

After  the  expression  of  these  views,  Card.  Del  Monte,  one 
of  the  presidents  of  the  Council,  closed  the  disputation  in 
these  words:  "The  matter  has  been  discussed  and  prepared. 
We  come  now  to  the  form.  The  majority  holds  that  the 
Vulgate  should  be  received,  but  care  must  be  taken  lest  the 
others  should  be  thought  to  be  tacitly  rejected."  The 
"others"  are  evidently  the  orginal  texts  and  the  old  ver- 
sions. Could  anything  be  clearer?  The  Fathers  took 
thought  lest  their  action  might  seem  to  be  the  tacit  repudia- 
tion of  the  other  texts. 

This  sense  is  confirmed  by  the  express  declarations  of 
some  of  the  principal  theologians  of  the  Council.  Salmeron, 
S.  J.,  who  was  one  of  the  Pope's  theologians  in  the  Council, 
declares :  "  We  shall  show  that  the  approbation  of  Jerome's 
translation  imported,  in  no  way,  the  rejection  of  the  Greek 
or  Hebrew  texts.  There  was  no  question  of  Greek  or 
Hebrew  texts.  Action  was  only  taken  to  determine  which 
was  the  most  excellent  of  the  many  Latin  versions.  The 
Council  left  every  man  free  to  consult  the  Greek  and  Hebrew 
texts,  that  he  might  thereby  emend  its  errors,  or  elucidate 
its  sense,  hence,  without  infringement  on  the  authority  of 
the  Council,  where  the  texts  differ,  we  may  make  use  of  the 
text  from  the  Greek  or  Hebrew  copy,  and  expound  it  as  a 
text  of  Scripture.  We  may  use  such  text,  not  alone  for 
moral  instruction,  but  also  use  it  as  a  Scriptural  basis  for  the 
dogmas  of  the  Church. " 

The  same  testimony  is  rendered  by  the  Franciscan, 
Andrea  Vega,  whose  wisdom  was  held  in  great  repute  by  the 
Fathers  of  Trent.  In  his  work,  De  Justificatione  XV.  9, 
he  thus  addresses  Calvin:  "  Lest  thou  shouldst  err,  O  Calvin, 
regarding  the  approbation  of  the  Vulgate,  give  ear  to  a  few 
things,  which  I  would  wish  Melancthon  also  might  hear, 
who  also,  before  you,  arraigned  the  Fathers  for  this.  The 
Synod  did  not  approve  the  errors  which  linguists  and  those 
moderately  versed  in  Holy  Scripture  find  in  the  Vulgate. 
Neither  did  they  ask  that  it  be  adored  as  though  it  had 


THE   AUTHORIZATION   OF   THE   VULGATE  747 

descended  from  Heaven.  The  Fathers  knew  that  the  inter- 
preter was  not  a  prophet,  .  .  .  and,  therefore,  the 
Synod  did  not  restrain,  nor  wish  to  restrain,  the  labors  of 
linguists,  who  teach  us  that  certain  things  might  be  better 
translated,  and  that  the  Holy  Ghost  could  signify  many 
things  by  one  and  the  same  word,  and,  at  times,  a  sense 
more  apt  than  can  be  obtained  from  the  Vulgate.  But  con- 
sidering the  Vulgate's  age,  and  the  esteem  in  which  it  was 
held  for  centuries  by  Latin  Councils  which 'used  it,  and  in 
order  that  the  faithful  might  know— -which  is  most  true — 
that  no  pernicious  error  can  be  drawn  therefrom,  and  that 
the  faithful  can  read  it  safely  without  danger  to  faith,  and 
to  remove  the  confusion  caused  by  a  multitude  of  trans- 
lations, and  to  modify  the  tendency  to  continually  produce 
new  versions,  the  Council  wisely  enacted  that  we  should  use 
the  Vulgate  in  all  public  readings,  disputations  and  exposi- 
tions of  Scripture.  And  it  declared  it  authentic  in  this  sense, 
that  it  might  be  known  to  all  that  it  was  never  vitiated  by 
any  error  from  which  any  false  doctrinal  or  moral  teaching 
might  result;  and  for  this  reason  it  decreed  that  no  one 
should  reject  it  on  whatsoever  pretext.  And  that  this  was 
the  mind  of  the  Council,  and  that  it  wished  to  decree  nothing 
further  than  this,  you  may  draw  from  the  words  of  the 
Council.  And  lest  you  should  doubt  of  this,  I  am  able  to 
invoke  a  veracious  witness,  his  Eminence  the  Cardinal  of 
Holy  Cross  (Card.  Cervini,  afterwards  Pope  Marcellus  II.), 
who  presided  over  all  the  sessions.  Both  before  and  after 
the  decree,  more  than  once,  he  testified  to  me  that  the 
Fathers  wished  nothing  more  for  the  Vulgate.  Hence  you 
are  not  hindered  neither  is  anyone  else  by  the  approbation 
of  the  Vulgate  from  recurring,  in  doubt,  to  the  original 
texts,  and  one  may  bring  forth  out  of  them  whatever  he 
may  find,  in  order  that  the  sense  of  the  Latin  may  be  cleared 
and  enriched,  and  that  he  may  purge  the  Vulgate  from 
errors,  and  arrive  at  those  things  most  consonant  with  the 
sense  of  the  Holy  Ghost  and  the  original  texts. "  (Mariana, 
I.e.) 

We  come  in  possession  of  two  truths  in  this  testimony : 
first,  that  Vega  has  the  mind  of  the  Council  of  Trent,  and, 


748  THE   AUTHORIZATION   OF   THE    VULGATE 

secondly,  that  the  action  of  the  Fathers  was  just  and  tem- 
perate. While  Mariana  was  teaching  at  Rome,  question 
arose  relating  to  the  real  sense  of  the  decree  of  Trent.  The 
General  of  the  Jesuit  order  at  that  time  was  James  Laynez, 
a  man  of  great  erudition  and  judgment,  who  had  himself 
taken  part  in  every  session  of  the  Council  of  Trent.  He  was 
petitioned  to  explain  to  the  Order  the  real  sense  of  the  de- 
cree, and  on  the  testimony  of  Mariana,  his  response  was  sub- 
stantially the  same  as  the  testimony  of  Vega. 

Didacus  de  Andrada  deserves  to  rank  among  the  first 
theologians  of  the  Council.* 

He  was  not  in  the  fourth  session,  in  which  the  Vulgate 
was  approved,  but  as  a  subsequent  member  of  the  Council 
he  certainly  knew  the  mind  of  the  Fathers.  He  approves 
the  declaration  of  Vega  and  declares  ''that  we  are  to  so 
defend  the  excellence  and  dignity  of  the  Vulgate,  that  we  in 
no  way  obstruct  the  Hebrew  founts  whence  the  saving 
streams  of  truth  have  flown  forth  to  us.  And  on  the  other 
hand  we  are  so  to  venerate  the  old  Hebrew  text  that  we 
reject  not  the  authority  and  majesty  of  the  Vulgate. " 
(Andrada,  Defens.  Trid.  Fidei  IV.  p.  257). 

The  excellence  which  the  Fathers  of  Trent  attested  of  the 
Vulgate  is  well  expressed  by  Sixtus  of  Sienna:  ''Although 
errors  are  found  in  the  Vulgate,  it  is  certain  that  neither  in 
the  old  edition  nor  in  the  new  was  anything  ever  found 
which  is  dissonant  from  Catholic  faith,  or  false  or  contrary 

*Di<iacus  de  Pavia  de  Andrada,  was  born  at  Coimbra  in  Portugal,  in 
1528.  He  entered  the  Church  at  the  age  of  thirty,  was  sent  by  King  Se- 
bastian of  Portugal  to  the  Council  of  Trent.  He  was  both  profound  and 
eloquent.  While  at  Trent  he  wrote  the  following  edifying  words: 
"  While  in  the  Council  of  Trent,  I  was  wont  to  say  that  even  if  the  au- 
thority of  the  Councils  were  not  authorized  and  confirmed  by  Christ,  I 
could  easily  give  assent  to  their  definitions,  being  moved  by  such  an  ex- 
cellent method  of  ascertaining  truth."  While  at  Trent  he  wrote  "An  Ex- 
planation of  the  Orthodox  Faith,"  an  excellent  polemic  apologetic  work. 
It  was  espeially  directed  against  Chemnitz.  The  heretic  responded,  and 
Andrada  wrote  against  him  his  most  celebrated  work,  "A  Defense  of 
the  Tridentine  Catholic  Faith."  This  work  has  now  become  very  rare. 
The  work  was  much  esteemed  by  the  Roman  theologians  and  by  the 
Pope  himself.  In  this  work  he  defends  the  Council 's  decree  concerning 
the  Vulgate.     He  died  in  1578. 


THE   AUTHORIZATION    OF   THE   VULGATE  749 

to  doctrine  or  morality,  or  interpolated,  or  changed  to 
disagree  with  truth,  or  omitted  to  the  prejudice  of  truth,  or 
so  corrupted  that  it  would  furnish  occasion  of  pernicious 
error,  or  occasion  and  incite  to  heresy,  or  thus  obscurely  and 
ambiguously  translated  that  it  would  obscure  the  mysteries 
of  our  faith,  or  in  which  the  saving  truth  is  not  sufficiently 
explained. "     (Sixt.  Sen.  Biblioth.  Sancta.) 

The  opponents  of  the  Catholic  faith  sometimes  allege  as 
the  Catholic  position,  the  opinion  of  Basil  Poncius  (ti626), 
the  Chancellor  of  the  University  of  Salamanca.  He  declares : 
''In  my  judgment  it  must  be  affirmed  according  to  the 
Council's  decree,  that  not  only  are  all  things  in  the  Vulgate 
true,  but  that  they  are  also  in  strict  conformity  with  the 
original  text,  and  their  sense  faithfully  rendered  by  the 
interpreter,  so  that  he  has,  neither  by  ignorance  nor  negli- 
gence, erred  in  the  least  thing,  but  that  all  things,  even  the 
most  minute,  are,  as  regards  the  sense,  faithfully  translated. 

And  this  is  the  common  opinion  of  our  time." 

(Migne,  Cursus  S.  S.  I.,  p.  878). 

From  the  fact  that  Poncius  prefaced  this  declaration  by  a 
long  chapter  wherein  he  gives  numerous  examples  of  erron- 
eous translations  of  the  Vulgate,  we  are  led  to  suspect  that 
he  is  here  defending  the  current  opinion  of  Spain  somewhat 
after  the  manner  that  Galileo  defended  the  Ptolemaic  sys- 
tem in  his  dialogues .  It  is  a  certain  fact  that  the  fear  of  the 
Inquisition  in  Spain  was  unduly  reactionary  on  theological 
opinion  in  Spain  in  those  days.  At  all  events,  the  common 
opinion  of  Spain  could  not  have  been  what  he  says,  for  we 
have  adduced  the  testimonies  of  her  best  theologians,  which 
are  directly  opposed  to  his  position.  The  only  argument 
which  he  adduces  in  support  of  his  opinion  is,  that  the  Coun- 
cil declared  the  Vulgate  authentic.  Now,  in  the  first  place, 
we  deny  that  the  Council  promulgated  a  dogmatic  definition 
that  the  Vulgate  was  authentic.  It  made  it  of  faith,  that 
the  Books  of  the  Catholic  Canon  with  all  their  parts,  as  they 
were  found  in  the  Vulgate,  were  sacred  and  canonical.  This 
is  of  faith,  and  an  anathema  was  fulminated  against  any  one 
who  should  gainsay  such  truth.  This  certainly  implies  that 
the  Vulgate  has  preserved  the  substance  of  all  these  books. 


750  THE    AUTHORIZATION   OF   THE    VULGATE 

SO  that  the  element  which  made  them  sacred  and  inspired  as 
they  came  from  the  writer's  hand  has  persevered  in  them. 
This  is  of  faith.  But  the  decree  concerning  the  use  of  the 
Holy  Books  is  disciplinary. 

The  fixing  of  the  Canon  was  a  dogmatic  fact — the  decree 
that  the  text  of  Scripture  which  the  Church  used  is  substan- 
tially the  word  of  God  was  also  dogmatic ;  but  the  selection 
of  the  Vulgate  as  the  official  version  was  an  act  of  discipline, 
and  though  directed  by  the  Holy  Ghost  only  demanded  that 
the  Vulgate  contain  the  substance  of  God's  word  without 
pernicious  error.  The  very  words  of  the  decree  warrant 
this.  When  a  council  binds  men's  faith  by  dogmatic  decree, 
the  words  clearly  imply  such  design.  But  here,  on  the  con- 
trary, in  the  clearest  terms  the  Council  maps  out  the  disci- 
pline of  the  Church,  as  regards  the  reading  of  the  Latin 
Scripture.  Of  course  in  this  matter  dogma  and  discipline 
are  correlated.  The  Council,  acting  by  the  Spirit  of  God, 
could  not  and  did  not,  authorize  a  substantially  defective 
version  of  Scripture.  So  that  this  disciplinary  decree  rests 
on  the  dogmatic  status  of  the  books,  established  in  the  pre- 
ceding decree.  Now  the  Fathers,  in  making  the  books 
authentic  in  the  discipline  of  the  Church,  based  their  action 
on  a  dogmatic  authenticity,  which  they  by  former  decree 
had  declared  of  the  books.  The  motive  of  this  declaration 
of  authenticity  was  not  the  strict  conformity  between  the 
Vulgate  and  the  original  text.  The  Fathers  never  exam- 
ined such  conformity.  The  motion  to  do  so  was  submitted, 
but  it  was  lost.  The  Fathers  based  their  action  on  the  fact 
that  the  Church  had  used  for  well  nigh  a  thousand  years  this 
edition  of  the  Latin  Scriptures.  It  had,  for  all  these  ages, 
been  the  great  Scriptural  deposit  of  the  Church,  and  the 
Fathers  infallibly  judged  that  it  was  not  compatible  with 
God's  relation  to  the  Church,  that  he  should  allow  her  to  thus 
adopt  a  version  of  Scripture,  which  did  not  accurately  con- 
tain the  substance  of  God's  written  message  to  man.  The 
Fathers,  therefore,  understood  by  authenticity  that  the 
version  contained  the  substance  of  that  message. 

This  clear  and  well  warranted  position  at  once  does  away 
with  the  opinion  of  Poncius,  and  it  establishes  the  real  basis 
upon  which  we  may  examine  the  actual  state  of  the  Vulgate. 


THE   AUTHORIZATION   OF    THE   VULGATE  751 

The  truth  of  our  position  is  corroborated  by  the  history 
of  the  decree.  When,  during  the  existence  of  the  Council, 
the  decree  was  sent  to  Rome  for  the  Pope's  approbation,  the 
Roman  theologians  protested  against  it,  affirming  that  there 
were  many  errors  in  it  that  could  not  be  attributed  to  the 
copyists,  but  which  were  certainly  due  to  the  translator 
himself.  In  fact,  such  a  storm  was  raised,  that  there  was 
thought  of  delaying  the  printing  of  the  decree  till  changes 
might  be  made.  When  this  was  made  known  to  the  Papal 
legates  in  the  Council  they  made  answer  that  nothing  was 
alleged  by  the  Roman  theologians. that  the  Council  had  not 
maturely  weighed.  The  Tridentine  Fathers  had  adverted  to 
the  errors  of  the  Vulgate,  but  they  were  warranted  in  declar- 
ing it  not  substantially  erroneous.  (Pallavic.  Hist.  Cone. 
Trid.  VI.) 

The  dullest  mind  must  see  that  there  was  no  question  of 
absolute  conformity  with  the  original  text,  or  of  immunity 
from  errors  which  affected  not  doctrine  and  morals. 

Our  position  is  strengthened  b}'-  this  final  consideration. 
The  Council  approved  the  then  existing  Latin  Vulgate,  at 
the  same  time  that  it  was  informed  by  the  particular  congre- 
gation that  all  the  Latin  texts  were  defective,  though  the 
Vulgate  was  the  best  of  them.  And  the  work  of  emending 
this  same  approved  Vulgate  was  taken  up  immediately  by 
the  authority  of  the  Pope  himself.  This  shows  clearly  that 
the  Council  merely  declared  that  the  truths  of  God  had 
persevered  in  the  Latin  version  with  all  its  faults,  and  that  it 
was  the  mind  of  the  Church  that  these  errors  should  be 
reduced  to  a  minimum.  And  even  in  the  preface  to  the 
Clementine  edition  of  the  Vulgate,  we  are  told  that  certain 
things  which  deserved  to  be  changed  were  left,  to  avoid  the 
scandal  of  the  people. 

Even  during  the  authorized  revision  of  the  Vulgate, 
Salmeron,  who  was  one  of  the  theologians  of  the  Council, 
declared:  "In  the  meantime,  while  the  Vulgate  is  being 
revised,  nothing  prevents  one  from  correcting  the  evident 
errors,  either  by  means  of  the  Hebrew  and  Greek  text,  or 
from  the  various  readings  of  the  Fathers,  or  by  a  clearer 


752  THE   AUTHORIZATION   OF  THE   VULGATE 

understanding  of  the  text  itself,  provided  that  such  a  one  in 
such  a  grave  matter  is  prepared  to  submit  himself  to  the 
Church  if  she  should  decide  othei-wise. "  (Salmeron,  Proleg. 
III.  p.  24.)  This  is  the  golden  rule  for  all  theologians.  Re- 
lying on  this,  a  theologian  can  freely  conduct  any  re- 
search, sustained  by  the  thought  that  if  he  speaks  true 
things,  the  Church  will  commend  him,  and  she  will  safe- 
guard him  from  error. 

The  opponents  of  our  position  are  of  two  classes.  The 
protestants  insist  on  an  absolute  approbation  of  the  Vulgate 
that  they  may  thence  move  an  objection  against  the  Church. 
Some  Catholics  interpret  the  Council's  word  in  a  like  manner 
through  mistaken  zeal  for  orthodoxy.  From  one  or  the 
other  of  these  motives  they  adduce  the  three  following  argu- 
ments : 

I.  Richard  Simon  (Hist.  Crit.  du  V.  Test.  7,  p.  268) 
cites  the  following  decree:  **0n  the  17th  of  January,  1576, 
the  General  Congregation,  through  S.  L.  A.  S.  Montald. 
Sixt.  Carafa,  declares  that  nothing  can  be  asserted  which  is 
not  in  conformity  with  the  Vulgate,  even  though  it  be  one 
sentence,  or  a  phrase  or  clause,  or  a  word,  or  a  syllable,  or 
even  an  iota.  "  Richard  Simon  found  this  declaration  repro- 
duced by  Leo  Allatius.  It  appears  to  be  a  plain  forgery. 
Its  original  was  never  found,  though  diligent  search  was 
made  in  the  archives  of  Rome.  Franzelin  declares  that 
Father  Perrone  had  informed  him  that  Pius  IX.  had  de- 
clared, by  word  of  mouth,  that  even  if  the  declaration  did 
exist,  nothing  more  was  commanded  thereby  than  that  one 
should  not  reject  the  Vulgate  in  matters  of  faith  and  morals. 
(Franz.  De  Trad.  p.  563.) 

In  a  manuscript  in  the  Vatican  (Lat.  6326)  there  is  a 
commentary  on  the  Canons  of  Trent  by  the  hand  of  Card. 
Carafa,  who  was  first  Prefect  of  the  Council  of  Trent.  Com- 
menting the  words  **cum  omnibus  suis  partibus  "  he  declares : 
"Wherefore  the  Sacred  Congregation  of  the  Council  judges 
that  one  incurs  the  censure  if  he  changes  a  single  sentence, 
or  clause,  or  phrase,  or  word,  or  syllable,  or  an  iota;  and 
Vega  (De  Justific.  IV.  9)  is  to  be  severel}^  censured  for  having 
spoken  rashly  in  this  matter. " 


THE   AUTHORIZATION   OF   THE   VULGATE  753 

This  has  no  dogmatic  force:  it  was  the  exaggerated 
theory  of  a  theologian,  and  there  were  many  such. 

And  in  any  case ,  this  Congregation  had  naught  to  do 
with  matters  of  faith.  The  decree  is  either  a  forgery,  or  a 
discipHnary  ruHng  of  a  council,  and  avails  naught  in  the 
present  question. 

2.  They  insist  on  the  former  decree,  which  binds  us  to 
receive  the  books  with  all  their  parts.  Now,  they  say,  every 
word  is  a  part. 

The  very  enunciation  of  this  proposition  shows  its 
absurdity.  Every  word  is  a  mathematical  part  of  the  books, 
but  it  is  not  a  moral  part  in  the  sense  that  the  Council  spoke. 
They  were  legislating  against  those  who  rejected  the  deutero- 
canonical  parts  of  the  Holy  Books  and  certain  passages  of 
the  Gospels,  and,  in  virtue  of  their  decree,  every  integral 
part  of  the  books  is  sacred  and  canonical.  And  they  meant 
not  by  this  to  imply  that  there  was  an  absolute  conformity 
between  these  parts  and  the  original  inspired  text,  but  that 
the  inspired  truths  had  substantially  endured  in  all  the  parts 
of  the  books.  The  Holy  Ghost  only  guided  them  in  the 
truth  of  the  proposition,  and  in  a  general  supervision  of  the 
words  of  their  decree,  so  that  in  clothing  their  thoughts  with 
words,  the  Fathers  spoke  as  human  agents,  and  their  diction 
may  at  times  come  short  of  absolute  clearness.  The  history 
of  the  several  decrees  and  the  scope  of  their  legislation  aid  us 
in  seizing  the  real  sense  of  the  decrees.  Hence,  we  hold 
simply  the  divinity  and  canonicity  of  the  parts,  as  that  term 
was  taken  in  the  mind  of  the  Fathers.  Hence,  the  decree 
only  contemplates  the  substantial  integrity  of  all  the  books. 
This  allows  that  even  whole  sentences  should  be  wanting 
from  the  Vulgate  that  are  genuine  in  the  original,  and  that 
there  may  be  whole  sentences  in  the  Vulgate  which  never 
were  in  the  original,  provided  no  error  is  in  them  contained. 
And  there  may  be  sentences  in  the  Vulgate  of  dogmatic 
import,  whose  sense  is  not  that  of  the  original,  provided  in 
the  same  way  that  nothing  contrary  to  faith  or  morals  could 
result  therefrom.  The  Vulgate  reproduces  sufficiently  the 
substance  of  God's  written  message,  and  leaves  a  legitimate 
field  to  the  science  of  textual  criticism. 

48  (H.S.) 


754         THE  CORRECTION  OF  THE  VULGATE 

Hence,  we  are  not  prevented  by  the  decree  of  the  Vulgate 
from  correcting  the  Latin  of  the  Vulgate :  "  Omnes  quidem 
resurgemus,  sed  non  omnes  immutabimur, "  (I.  Cor.  XV. 
5.),  in  accordance  with  the  Greek,  to  ''Omnes  quidem  non 
dormiemus,  sed  omnes  immutabimur," 

The  text  is  dogmatic,  and  although  the  Vulgate  has  not 
brought  out  Paul's  idea,  it  contains  no  error,  for  all  men 
shall  arise,  and  all  shall  not  put  on  the  incorruption  of  the 
elect.  We  maintain  also  that  the  character  of  the  famous 
verse  I.  Jo.  V.  7.  must  be  treated  independently  of  the 
Council's  decree.  That  it  contains  no  error  we  know  from 
the  authority  that  they  gave  to  the  book.  Whether  it  was 
in  the  genuine  Epistle  of  St.  John  or  not,  must  be  decided  by 
means  of  the  data  of  textual  criticism. 

3.  The  third  argument  of  the  adversaries  hardly 
deserves  mention.  They  maintain  that  if  we  are  not  to 
reject  the  Vulgate  on  any  pretext,  it  results  that  we  can  not 
reject  any  verse  or  word  of  it. 

This  is  mere  cavil.  The  Council's  decree  here  is  only 
disciplinary,  and  relates  to  the  rejection  of  passages  wherein 
is  contained  some  substantial  truth  of  Scripture.  The 
very  conception  of  the  argument  of  the  opposition  is  an 
insult  to  the  intelligence  of  the  Fathers  of  Trent. 

We  shall  not  speak  of  the  many  errors  recognizable  in 
the  Vulgate.  We  have  built  a  basis,  and  in  our  exegesis  of 
the  Holy  Text  we  shall  judge  the  several  passages  in  accord- 
ance with  the  data  here  explained. 

Chapter  XXV. 
The  Correction  op  the  Vulgate. 

The  second  abuse  which  the  Council  of  Trent  was  to 
remedy  was  the  corruption  of  the  Latin  codices,  and  the 
remedy  was  that,  by  the  authority  of  the  Pope,  a  correct 
edition  of  the  Vulgate  might  be  submitted  to  the  Council 
and  approved  by  the  Pope.  The  work  of  emending  the  Vul- 
gate was  judged  by  the  Fathers  of  Trent  to  be  so  easy  in 
execution  that  a  corrected  copy  might  be  sent  to  them  while 
yet  assembled  in  council.  On  the  24th  of  April,  1546,  Card. 
Cervini  had  written  to  Rome :  "  Staremo  adunque  aspettando 


THE    CORRECTION   OF   THE   VULGATE  755 

che  voi  ci  mandiate  presto  una  bella  Bibbia  corretta  et  emen- 
data  per  poter  stamparla. "  (Vercellone,  1.  c.  p.  84.)  But 
it  took  forty  years  to  execute  the  correction  recommended 
by  the  Council  of  Trent. 

In  the  present  work  we  can  only  treat  briefly  of  the 
immense  labor  that  was  expended  on  this  emendation. 
Ungarelli  and  Vercellone  have  ably  written  the  history  of  the 
correction  of  the  Vulgate. 

The  first  movement  to  execute  the  Council's  recommend- 
ation was  made  by  the  University  of  Louvain.  The  Domin- 
ican, John  Henten  (11566)  was  appointed  by  the  faculty  to 
revise  the  Vulgate.  Henten  brought  to  the  task  a  fair 
knowledge  of  Hebrew  and  Greek.  The  work  appeared  at 
Louvain  in  1547,  under  the  title:  Biblia  Latina  ad  Vetus- 
tissima  exemplaria  recens  castigata.  Henten  collated  about 
twenty  codices  in  the  preparation  of  this  work,  but  none  of 
his  codices  go  back  beyond  the  tenth  century,  so  that  the 
edition  can  not  be  considered  a  great  critical  work.  The 
work  of  Henten  was  very  favorably  received,  and  many 
editions  of  it  were  issued  by  the  press  at  Louvain. 

After  the  death  of  Henten,  the  faculty  of  Louvain 
selected  Lucas  of  Bruges  to  revise  the  work.  He  was 
assisted  by  Molanus,  Hunnaeus,  Reinerius  and  Harlem. 
Henten 's  text  was  allowed  to  stand,  but  the  revisers  added 
an  Apparatus  Criticus  from  upwards  of  sixty  codices.  The 
edition  was  printed  by  Plantin.  These  Bibles  enjoyed 
great  authority,  and  were  of  service  to  the  Roman  correctors 
of  the  Vulgate. 

The  Council  of  Trent  closed  on  the  4th  of  December, 
1563.  Immediately  after  its  close,  Pius  IV.  commissioned 
four  Cardinals  to  restore  the  text  of  the  Vulgate  to  its  pris- 
tine purity.  The  Cardinals  were  Mark  Antony  Colonna, 
William  Sirleti,  Louis  Madrutius,  and  Antony  Carafa. 
Sirleti  was  considered  the  greatest  linguist  of  his  age.* 

*Sirleti  was  bom  in  Calabria  in  Italy  in  15 14.  He  studied  at  Naples, 
and  acquired  such  a  command  of  Hebrew,  Greek  and  Latin  that  they 
became  as  his  mother  tongue.  He  studied  mathematics,  philosophy  and 
theology  in  Greek,  and  was  considered  one  of  the  most  learned  men  of  his 
age.     He  was  held  in  great  esteem  by  Pope  Marcellus  II.     Pius  IV. 


756         THE  CORRECTION  OF  THE  VULGATE 

The  first  of  their  labors  was  the  accurate  collation  of  the 
Codex  Paulinus,  which  Sirleti  held  in  high  esteem. 

Under  Pius  V.  the  correction  of  the  Vulgate  was  hindered 
for  the  reason  that  the  learned  men  were  occupied  in  correct- 
ing the  Breviary,  Missal  and  Martyrology.  Pius  V.  was  by 
no  means  negligent  in  the  great  work  of  correcting  the  Vul- 
gate, and  for  this  reason  appointed  the  most  learned  men  of 
Rome  to  co-operate  in  the  work.  Principal  among  the  theo- 
logians were  Antonio  Agellius  and  Emmanuel  Sa.  The 
commission  proceeded  slowly,  and  with  great  labor.  From 
the  28th  of  April  to  the  7th  of  December  of  the  year  1569, 
they  spent  in  revising  Genesis  and  Exodus.  The  theolo- 
gians had  held  twenty-six  general  conferences  before  the 
Cardinals  to  confer  on  this  portion  of  their  labors.  The 
fundamental  error  of  the  time  was  to  consider  the  work  easy, 
and  to  be  performed  quickly.  Without  doubt  those  men 
had  selected  the  right  method,  and  if  vexation  over  the 
delay  had  not  obstructed  their  labors  we  might  have  had  a 
much  better  text. 

Card.  Buoncompagno  succeeded  Pius  V.  in  1572,  and 
took  the  name  of  Gregory  XIII.  He  was  one  of  the  first 
canonists  of  his  age,  and  as  such  had  sat  in  the  Council  of 

thought  so  highly  of  him  that  he  committed  to  his  care  his  nephew  Charles 
Borromeo,  and  at  Charles'  request  he  created  Sirleti  cardinal.  After  the 
death  of  Pius  IV.,  there  was  thought  of  creating  Sirleti  Pope,  but  the 
judgment  prevailed  of  those  who  thought  that  the  drift  of  his  mind  was 
too  much  given  to  letters,  to  permit  a  strong  practical  administration  in 
those  stormy  times.  He  was  chosen  as  one  of  the  revisers  of  the  Vulgate 
by  Pius  IV.  and  continued  on  that  Congregation  imder  his  successor  Pius 
v.  He  assisted  in  revising  the  Missal  and  Breviary  under  Paul  V.  and 
was  also  at  the  head  of  the  Vatican  Library.  He  enriched  the  library 
by  many  valuable  works  in  the  Oriental,  Greek,  and  Latin  languages.  He 
was  beneficent  in  character,  and  greatly  assisted  needy  students.  He  died 
in  1583.  His  contemporaries,  without  reserve,  place  him  as  the  first 
Scriptural  scholar  of  his  age.  One  of  them  declared  "that  the  dreams  of 
Sirleti  were  more  learned  than  the  waking  creations  of  many  learned  men ; 
for  often  in  sleep  he  was  heard  to  discourse  in  Greek  and  Latin  of  some 
difficult  theme."  (Eggs.  Purpura  Docta,  I.  5,  11).  Latinus  Latinius 
declared  in  a  letter  to  Masius  (Op.  Latinii  Tom.  II.  p.  134)  that  from  per- 
sonal knowledge  he  judged  Sirleti  alone  to  equal  all  the  others  who  were 
associated  with  him  in  correcting  the  Vulgate.  This  remarkable  man  has 
left  nothing  of  importance  in  writing. 


THE  CORRECTION  OF  THE  VULGATE  757 

Trent.  He  brought  to  completion  the  correction  of  the 
liturgical  books,  and  then  turned  his  attention  to  the  cor- 
rection of  the  Calendar  and  the  revision  of  the  Corpus  Juris. 
His  claim  to  immortality  in  history  rests  mainly  on  the  cor- 
rection of  the  Calendar,  a  work  much  needed  and  well 
wrought. 

At  this  juncture  a  remarkable  man  came  into  important 
relations  in  the  Church.     This  was  Card.  Peretti.* 

He  moved  Gregory  XIII.  to  add  to  the  body  commis- 
sioned to  revise  the  Vulgate,  certain  consulting  theologians, 
chief  among  whom  were  Robert  Bellarmine,  Peter  Morini, 
and  Flaminius  Nobilius.  The  design  of  Peretti  was  to 
correct  first  the  Septuagint,  which  was  then  to  be  used  to 
revise  the  Vulgate.  When  Peretti  succeeded  Gregory  XIII., 
he  prosecuted  this  design  with  his  usual  energy,  and  in  the 
second  year  of  his  pontificate  (Oct.  8,  1856),  published  the 
best  edition  of  the  Septuagint  that  we  have  ever  received. 
See  page  697.  With  equal  energy,  he  next  took  up  the 
revision  of  the  Vulgate.     He  placed  at  the  disposition  of  the 

*Felix  Peretti  was  bom  in  1521,  in  a  small  village  of  the  Marches  of 
Ancona.  His  father  was  a  vine-dresser,  and  being  unable  to  rear  the  boy, 
gave  him  to  a  farmer,  who  set  him  to  herd  sheep  and  swine.  While  thus 
engaged,  a  Franciscan  monk  passed  that  way,  who  was  at  a  loss  to  find  the 
road  to  Ascoli.  Felix  directed  him  and  accompanied  him  to  the  convent. 
The  Franciscans,  recognizing  the  natural  endowments  of  the  youth, 
instructed  him.  He  entered  the  Order,  and  became  an  able  philosopher 
and  theologian.  He  was  ordained  priest  in  1545,  and  soon  after  was 
created  doctor  and  appointed  professor  at  Sienna.  It  was  at  this  juncture 
that  he  took  the  name  of  Montaltus,  by  which  he  is  sometimes  known. 
He  became  famous  as  a  preacher,  was  made  consultor  of  the  Inquisition 
and  procurator-general  of  his  Order.  Pius  V,  made  him  general  of  his 
Order  and  then  Cardinal.  We  are  informed  by  Gregory  Leti  that  during 
the  pontificate  of  Gregory  XIII.  Peretti  aspired  to  the  Papal  throne, 
and  that  to  promote  his  design,  he  withdrew  somewhat  from  public  affairs, 
affected  feeble  healh,  and  seemed  intent  only  on  preparing  for  death.  On 
the  death  of  Gregory  XIII.  there  was  a  deadlock  in  the  conclave,  and  they 
finally  agreed  on  Card.  Peretti  and  elected  him  Pope  on  the  24th  of  April, 
1585.     He  took  the  name  of  Sixtus  V. 

As  soon  as  he  was  assured  of  his  election,  he  threw  away  his  cane,  stood 
erect,  and  intoned  the  Te  Deum  in  a  voice  that  shook  the  chapel  walls. 
Whether  we  accept  this  account  or  not,  it  is  certainly  true  that  often,  when 
men  are  called  to  elect  a  man  for  an  office  which  they  themselves  ambition, 
in  their  inability  to  place  themselves  in  the  coveted  place,  they  will  be 
disposed  to  favor  the  candidacy  of  one  whose   condition   of  health   and 


758         THE  CORRECTION  OF  THE  VULGATE 

commission  the  best  codices  that  he  could  obtain.  He  even 
took  active  part  in  the  collation  of  these  codices.  The  num- 
ber of  the  members  of  the  commission  was  increased.  Anto- 
nio Agellius  (ti6o8)  who  was  very  capable  in  Hebrew  and 
Greek,  compared  dubious  readings  with  the  Greek  and 
Hebrew  texts.  Card.  Carafa  presided  over  the  whole  work, 
and  at  the  end  of  two  years  of  assiduous  labor,  the  completed 
correction  was  delivered  to  the  Pope.  The  scope  of  the 
revisers  .was  simply  to  restore  the  text  of  Jerome  to  its  pris- 
tine state.  They  did  not  contemplate  the  removal  of  the 
errors  which  Jerome  committed.  At  times,  however,  where 
the  reading  of  Jerome  could  not  be  determined  with  cer- 
tainty, they  employed  the  original  text  to  establish  the 
genuine  sense  of  Scripture.  The  method  of  these  men,  their 
reputation  for  learning  and  the  care  and  labor  that  they 
bestowed  on  the  Vulgate,  warrant  that  the  result  of  their 
labors  was  excellent.  But  the  action  of  the  Pope  entered 
to  frustrate,  in  large  part,  this  result.  The  commission  had 
made  much  use  of  the  Codex  Amiatinus  which  the  Pope  held 

period  of  life  promise  a  short  incumbency,  for  the  reason  that  they  may 
thus  again  be  allowed  to  contend  for  the  coveted  place.  It  is  certain  that 
such  causes  have  been  active  in  the  election  of  more  than  one  pope. 

The  election  of  Sixtus  V.  was  providential.  He  was  a  man  of  great 
energy  of  character,  and  a  man  of  action.  The  land  was  a  prey  to  liberti- 
nage,  brigandage,  and  all  sorts  of  violence.  Sixtus  met  this  state  of  things 
by  a  terrible  rigor.  He  caused  to  be  erected  special  gallows  to  punish 
immediately  those  guilty  of  licentiousness  during  the  carnival.  Before 
his  time  a  maiden  dared  not  walk  the  streets  without  fear  of  violence. 
The  nobles  had  been  unrestrained  in  their  treatment  of  the  daughters  of 
the  plebeians.  Sixtus  made  adultery  punishable  by  death.  Even  a 
husband  who  refused  to  denounce  an  adulterous  wife  was  condemned  to 
death.  Brigands  and  robbers  of  every  sort  were  hunted  down  and  hanged . 
By  these  measures,  Sixtus  restored  the  sanctity  of  law  am.ong  a  people  who 
can  only  be  held  to  law  by  fear.  He  erected  the  famous  obelisk  in  the 
Piazza  of  St.  Peter's,  enlarged  and  embellished  the  Vatican  Palace, 
enriched  the  Vatican  Library,  re-organized  the  Congregation  of  the  Holy 
Office  and  the  Congregation  of  Rites,  and  decreed  that  the  number  of 
cardinals  should  not  exceed  seventy.  This  number  has  been  observed  by 
his  successors.  Excess  of  labor  wore  him  out,  and  he  died  in  1590,  after  a 
pontificate  of  five  years.  The  Roman  people  broke  his  statue  in  pieces  in 
testimony  of  their  hatred  of  his  severity,  but  this  very  fact  entitles  him 
to  our  greater  commendation.  By  his  very  rigor,  he  was  able  to  disband 
the  soldiers,  and  uphold  the  law  by  the  force  of  his  own  character.  All 
things  considered,  Sixtus  V.must  be  considered  as  an  honor  to  the  Papacy. 


THE   CORRECTION   OF   THE  VULGATE  759 

in  little  esteem.  Moreover,  the  corrected  text  differed 
much  from  the  Bibles  of  Louvain  which  SiKtus  prized.  He, 
therefore,  read  carefully  their  work,  approved  what  he 
pleased  of  it,  and  rejected  a  great  part.  Card.  Carafa  pro- 
tested, but  in  vain. 

Sixtus,  to  his  energy  of  character,  added  a  certain  stub- 
bom,  excessive  trust  in  his  own  judgment.  His  action  here 
is  inexcusable,  and  rendered  void  the  conscientious  labors  of 
the  best  talent  of  Italy.  After  thus  inducing  these  changes, 
Sixtus  committed  the  printing  of  the  work  to  Aldo  Manuzio, 
who  had  succeeded  his  father  as  printer  at  the  Vatican  press. 
The  Augustinian  Angelo  Bocca  and  Francis  Toleti,  S.  J. 
were  appointed  to  see  the  work  through  the  press.  The 
Pope  himself  read  every  page  as  it  came  from  the  press.. 
The  work  appeared  in  a  magnificent  volume  in  1590. 

The  text  is  preceded  by  the  famous  bull,  "^temus  ille,  " 
of  Sixtus  V.  The  text  of  the  bull  is  given  in  full  in  Comely, 
op.  cit.,  p.  465,  et  seqq. 

Protestant's  allege  the  bull  as  an  evidence  of  the  Pope  s 
fallibility  in  doctrine.  Wherefore,  we  shall  examine  some 
of  its  salient  points.  The  bull  bears  the  date  of  the  Kalends 
of  March,  1589,  and,  as  Sixtus  testified  to  the  Venetian 
legate  on  the  third  of  the  following  July  that  the  Book  of 
Wisdom  was  then  in  press,  and  as  numerous  typographical 
errors  were  corrected  before  the  edition  was  given  to  the 
public,  we  must  infer  that  Sixtus  wrote  the  bull  in  view  of  a 
future  fact,  and  it  is  probable  that  the  bull  never  was  promul- 
gated. But  our  defense  of  papal  infallibility  rests  not  on 
this  data.  The  bull  contains  doctrinal  import  and  disciplin- 
ary measures.  These  latter  were  unwise,  and  were  pru- 
dently set  aside  by  his  successor.  But  in  matters  doctrinal, 
no  man  can  find  aught  that  is  repugnant  to  Catholic  faith 
in  the  bull.  The  constitution  opens  with  a  prolix  description 
of  the  origin,  and  history  of  the  Holy  Scriptures.  The  Pope 
speaks  of  the  various  readings  of  the  codices  and  their 
causes.  And  then  declares  that  in  these  many  various 
readings  nothing  was  ever  found  which  could  injure  faith  or 
morals.  This  position  no  man  can  shake.  The  pontiff 
commends  the  Council  of  Trent  for  its  remedial  measure,  and 


760  THE    CORRECTION   OF   THE   VULGATE 

regrets  that  its  execution  has  been  deferred.  He  next 
speaks  of  the  active  part  which  he  had  taken  in  the  revision, 
in  which  he  states  that  he  had  expended  many  hours  every 
day  in  judging  of  the  labors  of  others,  and  selecting  what 
seemed  good.  He  had  founded  a  fine  printing  press  for  the 
express  work  of  printing  these  editions,  and  he  had  read  the 
press  proofs  of  the  work.  He  declares,  moreover,  that  it 
was  not  his  mind  to  edit  a  new  translation  of  the  Vulgate, 
**sed  ut  Vulgata  Vetus  ex  Tridentinse  Synodi  prsescripto 
emendatissima,  prist inaeque  suae  puritati,  qualis  primum 
ab  ipsius  interpretis  manu  styloque  prodierat,  quoad  fieri 
potest,  restituta  imprimatur."  He  declares  that,  at  times, 
where  the  Latin  text  was  hopelessly  defective,  the  sense  had 
been  sought  from  the  Hebrew  and  Greek  text.  Sixtus 
testifies  of  his  great  veneration  for  Jerome,  and  insists 
repeatedly  that  care  was  taken  not  to  change  that  which  had 
grown  venerable  in  the  Church.  He  also  declares  that  he 
had  cut  off  the  Third  and  Fourth  Book  of  Ezra,  the  Third  of 
Maccabees  and  the  prayer  of  Menasseh,  and  certain  other 
passages  which  were  interpolated  in  the  Vulgate. 

At  length  the  pontiff  comes  to  this  point:  "With  certain 
knowledge,  and  in  plenitude  of  our  apostolic  authority,  we 
establish  and  declare  that  the  Latin  Vulgate  which  was 
received  by  the  Council  of  Trent  is  without  doubt  or  contro- 
versy this  very  edition  which  we  have  now  corrected  as  best 
we  were  able  and  caused  to  be  printed  in  the  Vatican  press, 
and  we  publish  it  to  be  read  in  the  universal  Christian 
w^orld,  and  in  all  the  Christian  churches,  declaring  that  this 
edition,  which  was  sanctioned  by  the  use  of  the  Christian 
people,  by  the  consensus  of  the  holy  Fathers,  by  the  decree 
of  Trent,  and  which  is  now  approved  by  the  authority  of  the 
apostolic  power  given  us  by  the  Lord,  is  to  be  received  as 
true,  lawful,  authentic,  and  undoubted,  in  all  public  and 
private  disputations,  and  in  the  public  reading,  preaching, 
and  exposition  of  Scripture.  And  we  strictly  forbid  for  all 
future  times  any  one  to  print  the  text  of  this  edition  of  the 
Vulgate  without  the  express  permission  of  the  Holy  See; 
and  let  no  one  even  privately  make  for  himself  another 
edition;  and  let  no  one  during  the  next  ten  years  dare  to 


THE  CORRECTION  OF  THE  VULGATE         761 

print  this  our  corrected  Vulgate  elsewhere  than  in  the  Vat- 
ican press.  And  after  the  lapse  of  ten  years,  we  order  that 
no  one  shall  dare  print  the  Holy  Scriptures  except  in  accord- 
ance with  the  exemplar  from  the  Vatican  press,  and  having 
the  authorization  of  the  Inquisitor,  or,  if  there  be  no  deputy 
of  the  inquisition  in  the  place,  of  the  ordinary  of  the  place, 
and  we  order  that  there  shall  be  no  change  in  anything. " 

The  pontiff  then  forbids  all  marginal  readings  in  the  text, 
orders  that  all  liturgical  books  be  corrected  in  accordance 
with  his  edition,  and  declares  to  be  without  authority  all 
other  Latin  texts.  The  constitution  closes  with  the  usual 
formula  of  promulgation,  with  an  excommunication  upon 
those  who  should  dare  infringe  the  bull,  and  is  signed: 
"Rome,  at  S.  Maria  Maggiore,  A.  D.  1589,  the  Kalends  of 
March,  the  fifth  year  of  our  pontificate. " 

The  only  affirmation  that  is  here  contained  is  that  his 
edition  was  the  Vulgate  of  Trent.  This  is  true,  and  could 
have  been  made  of  faith.  The  Vulgate,  even  before  he  or 
any  other  man  corrected  a  word  of  it,  was  the  Vulgate  of 
Trent,  and  contained  the  substantial  word  of  God.  God 
had  not  permitted  the  Latin  Scriptures  to  become  substan- 
tially corrupt.  He  did  not  permit  them  to  become  thus 
corrupt  in  the  Sixtine  edition.  While  we  deny  that  the  bull 
was  ever  promulgated,  and  though  it  finds  no  place  in  the 
■  Roman  Bullarium,  there  is  no  doctrinal  falsehood  in  it. 

As  to  its  disciplinary  enactment,  all  must  agree  that  it 
was  unwise  and  excessive.  It  was  never  imposed  on  the 
faithful,  and  the  Providence  of  God  brought  it  about  that 
the  Church  suffered  not  from  this  pope's  unwise  use  of 
power.  In  fact,  it  seems  that  Pope  Sixtus  V.  was  unduly 
prone  to  exercise  his  power. 

Sixtus'  work  was  done  when  order  had  been  restored, 
and  the  law  upheld  in  Italy.  It  times  of  peace  he  was  not 
equally  valuable  to  the  Church.  He  died  before  his  edition 
of  the  Vulgate  was  given  to  the  public.  After  his  death,  by 
universal  consent,  it  was  judged  necessary  to  correct  the 
edition.  The  typographical  part  was  poorly  done.  Waxed 
paper  was  pasted  over  certain  errors,  and  in  other  places 
cancellations  in  ink  were  apparent. 


762         THE  CORRECTION  OF  THE  VULGATE 

The  immediate  successor  of  Sixtus  V.,  Urban  VII.  died 
thirteen  days  after  his  election.  Gregory  XIV.  succeeded  in 
1590,  and  immediately  consulted  with  the  Congregation  as 
to  what  action  was  to  be  taken  on  the  Vulgate  of  Sixtus. 
The  tide  of  feeling  ran  high  against  Sixtus  V.,  and  the  mem- 
bers of  the  Congregation  moved  that  the  work  of  Sixtus  be 
proscribed.  Bellarmine  more  wisely  moved  that  the  edition 
be  corrected  with  all  possible  haste,  and  then  published,  that 
the  credit  of  the  defunct  pope  might  be  saved,  and  the 
scandal  of  the  people  averted. 

The  counsel  of  Bellarmine  prevailed  and  Gregory  at  once 
instituted  a  congregation  of  seven  cardinals  and  twelve 
theologians  to  revise  the  Sixtine  edition.  Card.  Mark 
Antony  Colonna  presided  over  all  the  deliberations  of  the 
Congregation;  and  principal  among  the  theologians  were 
Agellius,  Bellarmine,  Morini,  Toleti,  and  Rocca.  The  Pope 
was  consulted  on  the  most  difficult  passages. 

The  Congregation  proposed  as  a  leading  canon  in  the 
work  not  to  make  a  change  from  the  accepted  reading 
unless  necessity  required  it. 

The  Congregation  spent  forty  days  in  the  examination  of 
Genesis. 

It  became  evident  that,  in  this  mode  of  procedure,  years 
would  be  required  for  the  revision. 

Moved  by  this  consideration  Pope  Gregory  dissolved  the 
Congregation,  and  organized  a  new  body.  He  placed  at  the 
head  of  the  new  organization  two  cardinals,  Antony  Carafa 
Sr.  and  William  Allen.* 

*Williani  Allen  was  bom  at  Rossal  in  England  in  1532.  He  completed 
a  brilliant  course  of  study  at  Oxford,  but  was  exiled  from  England  for 
adherence  to  the  Catholic  faith.  He  fled  to  Louvain,  and  thence  to 
Malines,  where  he  was  ordained  priest  in  1565.  After  a  journey  to  Rome 
in  1567,  he  fixed  his  abode  at  Douay,  where  he  founded  the  English  Cath- 
olic College  to  prepare  priests  for  England.  He  was  ever  intent  in  aiding 
his  exiled  compatriots,  and  in  laboring  for  the  conversion  of  England. 
His  biographer,  Fitzherbert,  declares  of  him:  "Homo  natus  ad  Angliae 
salutem." 

He  executed  the  famous  Catholic  translation  of  Scriptiu^es,  called  the 
Douay  version.  He  was  created  Cardinal  in  1587  by  Sixtus  V.,  and 
appointed  a  member  of  the  Sixtine  Congregation  to  revise  the  Vulgate. 
He  died  at  Rome  in  1594. 


THE    CORRECTION   OF   THE   VULGATE  763 

Under  the  direction  of  these  two  cardinals,  eight  theolo- 
gians worked,  principal  among  whom  were  Bellarmine, 
Morini,  Agellius,  Rocca,  and  Valverde.  They  withdrew  to 
the  palace  of  the  Colonna  at  Zagarolo,  and,  according  to  the 
inscription  placed  in  the  palace  in  1723,  they  finished  their 
labors  in  nineteen  days.  The  great  work  had  been  done  by 
those  who  had  labored  before  them  in  the  correction,  and 
they  had  only  to  select  the  best  of  what  others  had  collected. 
In  October  of  1591  they  oflered  the  corrected  copy  to 
Gregory  XIV.  In  the  same  month  Gregory  XIV.  died. 
Innocent  X.,  who  succeeded  him,  died  on  the  30th  of  the 
following  December. 

In  January  of  1592,  Clement  VIII.  was  created  Pope, 
and  his  first  care  was  to  complete  the  correction  of  the  Vul- 
gate. He  appointed  the  two  Cardinals,  Frederick  Borromeo 
and  Augustus  Valerius,  to  supervise  the  work,  and  com- 
missioned Toleti,  S.  J.,  to  co-operate  with  them.  The  cardi- 
nals confided  the  whole  work  to  Toleti.  This  eminent  man 
wrote  upon  the  wide  margins  of  the  Sixtine  edition,  the 
corrections  which  had  been  recommended  by  the  Gregorian 
Congregation,  and  also,  in  certain  places,  recommended  cer- 
tain readings  which  he  had  approved  by  collation  of  the  best 
MSS.  On  the  28th  of  August,  1592,  Toleti's  work  was  sub- 
mitted to  the  cardinals  and  approved  by  them,  and  Rocca 
was  commissioned  to  write  them  on  the  margin  of  a  copy  of 
the  Sixtine  edition  for  the  printer. 

At  this  point  Valverde  interposed  an  objection.  Being 
an  able  Hebraist,  he  bore  it  ill  that  the  Vulgate  had  not  in  all 
places  been  rendered  conformable  to  the  Masoretic  text. 
He  presented  to  the  Pope  a  libellus,  wherein  were  over  two 
hundred  passages  in  which  the  Vulgate  differed  from  the 
Hebrew.  The  Pope  took  counsel,  and  after  mature  delibera- 
tion, forbade  Valverde  ever,  in  word  or  writing,  to  treat  of 
this  difference.  Such  treatment  of  a  man  seems  to  us  harsh, 
and  subversive  of  human  liberty,  but  we  must  consider  the 
nature  of  the  fact  and  the  circumstances.  The  proposition 
of  Valverde  was  against  the  first  design  in  all  the  corrections, 
which  was  not  to  re -translate  the  Scriptures  from  the  He- 
brew, but  to  restore  the  pristine  text  of  the  Vulgate.     The 


764  THE   CORRECTION   OF   THE   VULGATE 

divergencies  were  not  in  matters  of  faith  or  morals ;  in  many- 
cases  the  Masoretic  text  has  no  more  claim  to  purity  than 
the  Vulgate ;  the  people  were  waiting  for  the  Bible,  and  prone 
to  ugly  rumors  regarding  the  delay;  to  put  into  execution 
Valverde's  proposition,  would  have  necessitated  a  long 
period  of  toil,  for  they  could  not  adopt  his  readings  on  his 
sole  authority;  scholars  can  always  collate  the  two  texts,  so 
that  no  real  necessity  existed  for  the  changes ;  and  finally, 
had  Valverde  been  allowed  to  speak  his  views  to  the  public, 
an  ignorant  cry  would  have  been  raised  against  the  Latin 
text  of  the  Catholic  Church,  and  faith  would  have  suffered 
thereby.  There  were  but  two  ways,  either  to  do  what  he 
advised,  or  restrain  him  from  speaking.  The  former  was 
not  possible  at  that  time ;  the  latter  was  wisely  adopted. 

Clement  VIII.  appointed  Toleti  to  supervise  the  printing 
of  the  Vulgate;  and  Angelo  Rocca  to  correct  the  proofs. 
The  edition  was  pushed  rapidly  forward,  and  completed 
before  the  end  of  1592.  And  thus,  at  last,  the  design  form- 
ulated in  1546  by  the  Fathers  of  the  Council  of  Trent,  and 
approved  by  the  Pope,  was  put  in  effect,  and  the  Church 
received  an  authentic  version  of  Scripture. 

The  edition  differed  not  in  external  form  from  the  Sixtine 
edition.  It  was  printed  by  Aldo  Manuzio,  who  had  printed 
the  edition  of  Sixtus.  Moreover,  it  bore  at  first  the  name  of 
Sixtus  in  its  title:  "Biblia  Sacra  Vulgatas  Editionis  Sixti  V. 
Pont.  Max.  jussu  recognita  atque  edita. "  It  was  not  till 
1 641  that  the  name  of  Clement  VIII.  was  placed  in  the  title 
page,  and  the  honor  of  the  work  was  given  to  whom  it  by 
right  belonged.  Since  that  time  it  is  called  the  Clementine 
edition.  It  differs  from  the  Sixtine  edition  in  over  three 
thousand  texts. 

The  preface  of  the  Clementine  edition,  which  is  supposed 
to  have  been  written  by  Bellarmine  and  Toleti,  candidly 
admits  that  certain  things  "quae  mutanda  videbantur" 
were  left  unchanged  to  avoid  the  scandal  of  the  people,  and 
because  there  was  some  doubt  whether  the  original  texts  had 
remained  in  such  passages  free  from  corruption. 

The  edition,  therefore,  does  not  lay  claim  to  absolute  per- 
fection, but  it  is,  without  doubt,  the  best  translation  of  the 


THE   CORRECTION   OF  THE   VULGATE  765 

Scriptures  in  any  language.  Yet,  we  still  think  that  the 
Church  with  her  immense  resources,  human  and  divine, 
could  prepare  a  better  edition,  and  we  look  forward  to  future 
times  to  add  this  glory  to  the  works  of  the  Catholic  Church. 

The  difference  bet>veen  the  Sixtine  and  Clementine 
editions  was  made  the  subject  of  a  fierce  attack  on  papal 
infallibility  by  Thomas  James,  in  a  work  entitled  "  Bullum 
Papale,"  London,  1600.  He  has  been  ably  refuted  by 
Henry  Bukentop,  in  the  excellent  work  ''"ll^^p  'lli*^,  Lux  de 
Luce,"  Brussels,  1710.  The  line  of  defense  is  the  same  as 
we  have  pointed  out  in  treating  of  Pope  Sixtus'  work. 

In  the  preface  to  the  Clementine  edition  it  is  frankly  ad- 
mitted that  certain  things  which  ought  to  be  corrected  were 
left  unchanged  lest  the  people  might  take  scandal  on  account 
of  too  many  changes,  Lucas  of  Bruges  examined  and 
noted  over  four  thousand  places  in  the  Clementine  Vulgate 
which  demanded  correction.  This  long  deferred  work  is  now 
in  some  measure  to  be  done.  Pope  Pius  X.  has  entrusted 
to  the  Benedictines  the  first  work,  that  of  collating  the  MSS 
of  the  Hieronymian  version.  What  the  next  move  in  the 
work  of  Correction  will  be  one  can  not  say.  It  is  to  be  hoped 
that  a  more  thorough  revision  will  be  effected  than  that  of 
the  Council  of  Trent.  To  make  a  competent  revision  is  a 
labor  whose  magnitude  can  scarcely  be  realized.  Jerome's 
own  labors  must  be  revised,  and  this  necessitates  the  colla- 
tion of  the  MSS  of  the  ancient  versions,  and  the  revision  of 
their  texts.  In  the  New  Testament  the  Revised  Edition  of 
Oxford  effected  a  very  creditable  revision,  because  the 
Greek  MSS  had  been  collated  by  many  eminent  scholars ; 
but  the  Old  Testament  of  the  same  edition  is  merely  a 
servile  translation  of  the  Masoretic  text,  with  conjectures 
where  the  sense  is  defective.  Such  a  translation  of  the 
Masoretic  text  for  a  revision  of  the  Vulgate  would  be  of  no 
avail.  The  Catholic  Church  can  command  the  cooperation 
of  many  scholars ;  the  times  demand  a  thorough  and  com- 
plete revision ;  and  the  labors  now  auspiciously  begun  will 
be  watched  with  interest. 


766  MODERN   ENGLISH   VERSIONS    OF    SCRIPTURE 

Chapter  XXVI. 
Modern  English  Versions  of  Scripture 

One  of  the  calumnies  often  brought  against  the  Catholic 
Church  is  that  she  withheld  the  Bible  from  the  people,  by 
preventing  its  being  translated  into  the  vernacular.  It  is 
commonly  said  and  believed  that  Wyclif  was  the  first  to  give 
to  the  English  people  the  Bible  in  English.* 

The  most  hard -lived  of  all  lies,  is  a  controversial  lie,  and 
the  so-called  Reformation  has  found  in  such  its  most  power- 
ful ally.  The  Church  recognized  that  in  the  Scriptures  "  are 
some  things  hard  to  be  understood,  which  the  ignorant  and 
unsteadfast  wrest,  as  they  also  do  the  other  Scriptures,  unto 
their  own  destruction."     (II.  Pet.  III.  i6.) 

The  Church  therefore  regulates  the  vernacular  reading  of 
Scriptures  according  to  what  she  judged  best  for  the  people. 
The  wisdom  of  this  policy  is  acknowledged  by  candid 
protestants.  Mr.  Karl  Pearson  (Academy,  Aug.  7.  1886) 
declares :  *'  The  Catholic  Church  has  quite  enough  to  answer 
for  .  .  but  in  the  fifteenth  century  it  certainly  did  not  hold 
back  the  Bible  from  the  folk,  and  it  gave  them  in  the  ver- 
nacular a  long  series  of  devotional  works,  which  for  ie^nguage 
and  religious  sentiment  have  never  been  surpassed.  Indeed, 
we  are  inclined  to  think  it  made  a  mistake  in  allowing  the 
masses  such  ready  access  to  the  Bible.  It  ought  to  have 
recognized  the  Bible  once  for  all  as  a  work  absolutely  unintel- 
ligible without  a  long  course  of  historical  study ;  and,  so  far 
as  it  was  supposed  to  be  inspired,  very  dangerous  in  the 
hands  of  the  ignorant." 

*John  Wyclif  was  bom  in  York  in  1324.  He  studied  at  Oxford,  and  by- 
intrigues  afterwards  obtained  the  position  of  master  in  Balliol  College  from 
which  post  the  friars  had  been  ousted.  The  friars  appealed  to  the  Pope, 
and  he  restored  them.  Wyclif  then  raised  his  voice  against  Rome  and  the 
temporal  power. 

The  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  summoned  Wyclif  to  defend  himself 
before  a  Council  held  at  London  in  1377.  The  powerful  Duke  of  Lancaster 
defended  him,  and  he  was  absolved  by  the  Council.  Wyclif  was  in  grace 
with  the  State  because  he  advocated  the  giving  of  church  property  to  the 
State.  He  was  again  summoned  to  a  Council  at  Lambeth,  and  escaped 
condemnation.  The  bishops  of  England,  servile  to  the  State,  winked  at 
heresy.     Those  were  the  days  of  the  schism  at  Rome  between  Urban  VI. 


MODERN   ENGLISH   VERSIONS   OF  SCRIPTURE  767 

To  the  same  end  in  1530  a  royal  proclamation  was  made 
in  England  which  decrees  as  follows : — 

"  Having  respect  to  the  malignity  of  this  present  time, 
with  the  inclination  of  the  people  to  erroneous  opinions,  (it  is 
thought)  that  the  translation  of  the  New  Testament  and  the 
Old  into  the  vulgar  tongue  of  England  would  rather  be  the 
occasion  of  continuance  or  increase  of  errors  among  the  said 
people  than  any  benefit  or  commodity  towards  the  weal  of 
their  souls,  and  that  it  shall  be  now  more  convenient  that  the 
same  people  have  the  Holy  Scriptures  expounded  to  them 
by  preachers  in  their  sermons  as  it  hath  been  of  old  time 
accustomed." 

For  these  reasons  all  are  ordered  to  deliver  up  the  copies 
of  the  printed  Testament  "corruptly  translated  into  the 
English  tongue,"  the  king  promising  **to  provide  that  the 
Holy  Scripture  shall  be,  by  great  learned  and  Catholique 
persons,  translated  into  the  English  tongue,  if  it  shall  then 
seem  to  his  Grace  convenient  to  be."  (Gasquet,  The  Old 
English  Bible,  footnote  pp.   132  and  133.) 

The  Church  was  rightly  hostile  to  unauthorized  trans- 
lations of  Scripture  especially  as  many  in  those  days  made 
these  the  means  of  propagating  the  most  dangerous  errors. 
This  is  frankly  acknowledged  by  the  protestant  Dean  Hook. 
{Lives  of  Archbishops  of  Canterbury,  III.  p.  83).  ''  It  was  not 
from  hostility  to  a  translated  Bible,  considered  abstractedly, 
that  the  conduct  of  Wiclif  in  translating  it,  was  condemned. 

and  the  anti-pope,  Clement  VII.  The  time  was  apt  for  the  theories  of 
Wyclif.  He  preached  much,  and  his  writings  were  spread  through  the 
realm.  In  1382  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  condemned,  in  a  Council 
held  at  London,  twenty- four  propositions  of  Wyclif,  in  which  among  other 
errors  he  denied  the  real  presence  of  Jesus  Christ  in  the  Eucharist ;  affirmed 
that  priest  or  bishop  in  state  of  mortal  sin  could  not  baptize,  consecrate  or 
ordain ;  declared  that  confession  was  useless  to  a  contrite  man ;  denied  that 
Christ  instituted  the  Mass;  declared  that,  if  the  Pope  were  in  sin,  he  had  no 
authority  over  the  faithful ;  that  it  was  against  the  Scriptures  for  the  eccles- 
iastics to  have  property ;  and  declared  that  after  Urban  VI.  the  primacy  of 
Peter  had  failed,  and  the  nations  should  be  free  in  the  government  of  the 
national  church.     Wyclif  died  at  Lutterworth  in  1384. 

The  opinions  of  Wyclif  invaded  Bohemia  and  gave  rise  to  the  heresy  of 
John  Huss.  The  remarkable  success  of  these  heresiarchs  is  due  to  the 
fact  that  they  extend  the  power  of  the  State,  and  flatter  the  pride  and  inde- 
pendence of  the  human  heart 


768  MODERN   ENGLISH  VERSIONS   OF   SCRIPTURE 

Long  before  his  time  there  had  been  translators  of  Holy  Writ. 
There  is  no  reason  to  suppose  that  any  objection  would  have 
been  offered  to  the  circulation  of  the  Bible,  if  the  object  of 
the  translator  had  only  been  the  edification  and  sanctifica- 
tion  of  the  reader.  It  was  not  till  the  designs  of  the  Lollards 
were  discovered,  that  WiclifT's  version  was  proscribed. " 

Maitland  {Dark  Ages  p.  252)  a  writer  who  will  not  be 
suspected  of  being  too  friendly  to  the  Catholic  Church 
declares  that  he  found  no  evidence  that  the  Catholic  Church 
*'  strove  to  prevent  the  reading,  the  multiplication,  the  diffu- 
sion of  the  Word  of  God.  " 

In  the  British  Museum  alone  there  are  eleven  German 
editions  of  the  Bible  ranging  from  1466  to  15 18;  three 
Bohemian  editions  of  between  1488  and  1506,  one  Dutch 
edition  of  1 47  7 .  There  are  five  French  versions  from  1 5 1 o  to 
1 53 1,  and  seven  Italian  versions  of  between  147 1  and  1532. 
These  are  all  Catholic  versions.  It  has  been  conclusively 
proven  that  in  Germany  in  the  Middle  Ages  there  were 
seventy-two  partial  versions  of  the  Scriptures,  and  fifty  com- 
plete versions.  These  all  emanated  from  Catholic  sources. 
Seventeen  of  such  versions  were  made  before  the  time  of 
Luther.  And  yet  many  still  believe  that  Luther  was  the 
first  to  give  to  the  Germans  the  Bible  in  the  vernacular 
tongue.  The  Library  of  St.  Gall  contains  many  fine  Bibles 
in  the  vernacular  made  before  Luther's  time. 

The  explanation  of  the  fact  that  no  complete  English 
Bible  existed  before  the  time  of  Wyclif  is  thus  given  by 
Dom   Gasquet : 

"  We  are  apt  to  forget  the  fact  that  till  past  the  middle  of 
the  fourteenth  century  French  was  actually  the  tongue  of 
the  Court  and  of  the  educated  classes  generally.  Only  in 
1363,  for  the  first  time,  was  the  sitting  of  Parliament  opened 
by  an  English  speech,  and  in  the  previous  year  only  had  it 
been  enacted  that  the  pleadings  in  the  courts  of  law  might  be 
in  English  in  place  of  the  French  which  had  hitherto  been  the 
legal  language ;  but  even  then  the  record  of  the  proceedings 
was  still  to  be  in  Latin.  French,  however,  continued  for 
almost  a  century  longer  to  be  the  language  of  the  upper 
classes,  and  in  it  were  written  the  rolls  of  Parliament,  and 


THE   ANGLO-SAXON   VERSIONS  769 

such  wills  and  deeds  as  were  not  in  Latin.  An  explanation  of 
this  retention  of  the  French  language  is  of  course  to  be  found 
in  the  circumstances  of  the  time.  Before  the  era  of  Wy cliff 
consequently,  the  reading  public,  that  is  to  say,  the  higher 
classes  or  the  clergy,  found  in  the  Latin  version  of  the  Holy 
Scriptures,  or  in  such  French  versions  as  existed  in  England, 
what  they  required. 

"Such,  then,  is  the  very  simple  explanation  of  the  non- 
existence of  any  English  translation  of  the  entire  Bible 
before  the  time  when  Wy cliff  came  upon  the  scene.  In  the 
first  half  of  the  fourteenth  century  probably  the  only  entire 
book  of  Scripture  which  had  appeared  in  English  prose  was 
the  book  of  Psalms  translated  by  Richard  Rolle,  who  died 
in  1349.  This  work  he  undertook  at  the  request  of  Dame 
Margaret  Kirby,  a  recluse  at  Hampole.  At  the  same  time, 
probably  about  1320,  another  translation  of  the  Psalms  was 
made  by  William  de  Schorham,  a  priest  of  Chart  Sutton, 
near  Leeds,  in  the  county  of  Kent. 

**  Besides  these,  however,  there  were  the  metrical  para- 
phrases of  Genesis  and  Exodus,  the  Ormulum,  or  poetical 
version  of  the  Gospels  and  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  the  work  of 
an  Augustinian  canon  called  Orm,  and  more  than  one  metri- 
cal translation  of  the  Psalms,  approaching  almost  to  a  literal 
translation,  all  productions  of  the  thirteenth  century.  It 
is,  moreover,  of  interest  to  remark  that  after  the  Norman 
Conquest,  whilst  the  wants  of  the  educated  class  were  satis- 
fied by  the  Norman-French  translations,  the  Anglo-Saxon 
version  of  the  Gospels  was  copied  as  late  as  the  twelfth 
century."     {The  Old  English  Bible,  London  1897). 

It  is  very  doubtful  whether  the  entire  Scriptures  have 
ever  been  translated  into  Anglo-Saxon.  We  have  no  tradi- 
tionary account  of  a  complete  version,  and  all  the  Biblical 
MSS.  in  Anglo-Saxon  now  in  existence  contain  but  select 
portions  of  the  sacred  volume.  The  poems  on  sacred  sub- 
jects usually  attributed  to  Caedmon,  afford  the  first  feeble 
indications  of  an  attempt  being  made  by  the  Saxons  to  con- 
vey the  truths  of  Scripture  in  their  vernacular  tongue. 
Caedmon  lived  in  the  seventh  century ;  he  was  a  monk  in  the 
monastery  of  Streoneshalch  in  Northumbria.     His  poems 

An    /•XT  C3    N 


770  THE   ANGLO-SAXON  VERSIONS 

have  been  strung  together  so  as  to  form  a  sort  of  metrical 
paraphrase  on  some  of  the  historical  books  of  Scripture.  He 
commences  with  the  fall  of  the  angels,  the  creation  and  fall 
of  man,  and  proceeds  to  the  history  of  the  deluge,  carrying 
on  his  narrative  to  the  history  of  the  children  of  Israel,  and 
their  wanderings  in  the  desert.  He  also  touches  on  the 
history  of  Nebuchadnezzar  and  of  Daniel.  The  authen- 
ticity of  this  work  has  been  doubted,  some  writers  being  of 
opinion  that  it  was  written  by  different  writers  at  different 
periods ;  the  striking  similarity  between  some  of  the  poems 
and  certain  passages  in  Milton's  Paradise  Lost  has  been 
repeatedly  noticed.  Two  editions  have  been  printed;  the 
first  by  Francis  Junius  at  Amsterdam  in  1655,  and  the 
second,  with  an  English  translation  and  notes,  by  Mr.  Thorpe 
in  London,  in  1832. 

The  literal  versions  of  such  portions  of  the  Scripture  as 
have  been  translated  into  Anglo-Saxon  have  chiefly  been 
transmitted  to  us  in  the  form  of  interlineations  of  Latin 
MSS.  A  Latin  Psalter,  said  to  have  been  sent  by  Pope 
Gregory  to  Augustine,  is  still  preserved  among  the  Cottonian 
MSS,  and  contains  an  Anglo-Saxon  interlinear  version,  of 
which  the  date  is  unknown.  Aldhelm,  bishop  of  Sherborne, 
and  Guthlac,  the  first  Anglo-Saxon  anchorite,  translated  the 
Psalms  soon  after  the  commencement  of  the  eighth  century, 
but  their  MSS  are  lost,  and  nothing  is  known  with  certainty 
respecting  them.  The  same  may  be  said  concerning  the 
portions  of  Scripture  reported  to  have  been  translated  by  the 
Venerable  Bede.  At  the  time  of  his  death,  this  renowned 
historian  itvas  engaged  in  a  translation  of  the  Gospel  of  St. 
John,  and  almost  with  his  latest  breath  he  dictated  to  his 
amanuensis  the  closing  verse  of  the  Gospel.  Alfred  the 
Great  also  took  part  in  the  translation  of  the  Scriptures.  He 
translated  the  commandments  in  the  twentieth  chapter  of 
Exodus,  and  part  of  the  three  following  chapters,  which  he 
affixed  to  his  code  of  laws.  He  likewise  kept  a  **hand-boc," 
in  which  he  daily  entered  extracts  from  various  authors,  but 
more  especially  verses  of  Scripture  translated  by  himself 
from  Latin  into  Anglo-Saxon. 


FORMATIVE   PERIOD    OF   THE   ENGLISH   LANGUAGE       771 

There  are  three  different  versions  of  the  Four  Gospels  at 
present  known  to  be  in  existence,  The  most  ancient  of 
these  is  the  famous  Northumbrian  Gloss,  or  Durham  Book, 
preserved  among  the  Cottonian  MSS.  in  the  British  Mu- 
seum. This  MS.  is  one  of  the  finest  specimens  extant  of 
Saxon  writing.  The  Vulgate  Latin  text  of  the  Four  Gospels 
was  written  by  Eadfrid,  bishop  of  Lindisfame,  about  A.  D. 
680 ;  his  successor  in  the  see  adorned  the  book  with  curious 
illuminations,  and  with  bosses  of  gold  and  precious  stones; 
and  a  priest  named  Aldred  added  an  interlinear  gloss  or 
version,  probably  about  the  year  900.  The  second  Anglo- 
Saxon  version  of  the  Gospels  belongs  to  the  tenth  century, 
and  was  written  by  Farmen  and  Owen  at  Hare  wood,  or 
Harwood,  over  Jerome's  Latin  of  the  Four  Gospels.  The 
Latin  text  was  written  about  the  same  period  as  that  of  the 
Durham  Book,  having  been  made  during  the  seventh  cen- 
tury. This  valuable  MS.  is  in  the  Bodleian  Library,  and  is 
called  the  Rush  worth  Gloss,  from  the  name  of  one  of  its 
former  proprietors.  The  other  translation  of  the  Gospels 
was  made  by  an  unknown  hand,  apparently  not  long  before 
the  Norman  conquest,  and  is  thought  to  have  been  trans- 
lated from  the  Latin  version  which  was  in  use  before  Jer- 
ome's time. 

Two  editions  of  the  Anglo-Saxon  Psalter  have  been 
published.  The  first  appeared  in  1640;  it  was  printed  in 
London  under  the  care  of  Spelman,  from  an  ancient  MS.  by 
an  unknown  translator,  and  collated  with  other  MSS.  of 
equal  antiquity.  This  version  was  undoubtedly  made  from 
the  Latin  Vulgate,  which  interlines  with  the  Anglo-Saxon. 
A  splendid  edition  of  the  Psalms  was  published  in  1835  at 
Oxford:  the  MS.  which  forms  the  text  formerly  belonged  to 
the  Due  de  Berri,  the  brother  of  Charles  V.,  king  of  France, 
and  was  preserved  in  the  Royal  Library  at  Paris.  Mr. 
Thorpe,  the  editor  attributed  this  MS.  to  the  eleventh 
century ;  and  by  some  it  is  supposed  to  be  a  transcript  of  the 
version  executed  by  Aldhelm,  bishop  of  Sherborne,  in  the 
early  part  of  the  eighth  century.  It  is,  however,  rather  a 
paraphrase  than  a  version,  and  is  written,  partly  in  prose, 
and  partly  in  metre. 


772  EARLY   ENGLISH  VERSIONS   OF   SCRIPTURE 

A  partial  interlinear  translation  of  a  Latin  version  of 
Proverbs,  made  in  the  tenth  century,  is  preserved  among  the 
Cottonian  MSS  in  the  British  Museum.  To  the  same  century- 
belong  the  celebrated  translations  of  ^Ifric,  Archbishop 
of  Canterbury:  they  consist  of  the  Heptateuch,  or  first 
seven  books  of  the  Bible,  and  the  Book  of  Job.  An  edition 
of  this  version  was  published  by  Mr.  Th waits,  at  Oxford,  in 
1699,  from  an  unique  MS.  belonging  to  the  Bodleian  Library ; 
the  Book  of  Job  was  printed  from  a  transcript  of  a  MS.  in  the 
Cottonian  Library.  ^Ifric  in  some  portions  of  his  version 
adheres  literally  to  the  text ;  but  in  some  parts  he  appears  to 
aim  at  producing  a  condensation,  or  abridgment,  rather  than 
a  translation  of  the  events  related  by  the  inspired  historian. 
Like  the  other  Anglo-Saxon  fragments,  his  translation  was 
made  from  the  Latin  version. 

A  few  MSS.  of  the  Psalms,  written  shortly  before,  or 
about  the  time  of  the  Norman  conquest  are  extant,  and  show 
the  gradual  decline  of  the  Anglo-Saxon  language.  The 
history  of  the  language  may  still  farther  be  traced  in  three 
MSS.  yet  in  existence,  which  were  made  after  the  arrival  of 
the  Normans.  They  are  MSS.  of  the  same  translation,  and 
two  of  them  are  attributed  to  the  reign  of  Henry  the  Second : 
but  the  language  in  which  they  are  written  is  no  longer  pure 
Anglo-Saxon;  it  has  merged  into  what  is  designated  the 
Anglo-Norman. 

The  exact  period  of  the  transmutation  of  Saxon  into 
English  has  been  disputed,  but  it  seems  most  reasonable  to 
believe  that  the  process  was  gradual.  A  fragment  of  the 
Saxon  Chronicle,  published  by  Lye,  and  concluding  with  the 
year  1079,  exhibits  the  language  in  the  first  stage  of  its  transi- 
tion state,  no  great  deviation  having  then  been  made  from 
Anglo-Saxon.  But  in  the  continuation  of  the  same  chron- 
icle, from  1135  to  II 40  A.  D.,  the  commencement  of  those 
changes  may  be  distinctly  traced,  which  subsequently 
formed  the  distinctive  peculiarities  of  the  English  language. 
The  principal  change  introduced  about  this  period  was  the 
gradual  substitution  of  particles  and  auxiliary  words  for  the 
terminal  inflections  of  the  Anglo-Saxon.  The  English  has 
happily  retained  the  facility  of  its  parent  language  in  com- 


EARLY   ENGLISH   VERSIONS    OF   SCRIPTURE  773 

pounding  words,  the  only  difference  in  this  respect  being, 
that,  in  the  formation  of  its  compound  terms,  the  Anglo- 
Saxon  drew  only  from  its  own  resources,  whereas  the  Eng- 
lish has  had  recourse  to  the  Latin,  the  Greek,  the  French, 
the  Italian,  and  other  languages.  It  has  been  remarked  by  a 
distinguished  foreigner,  that  ''everywhere  the  principle  of 
utility  and  application  dominates  in  England,  and  consti- 
tutes at  once  the  physiognomy  and  the  force  of  its  civiliza- 
tion."  This  principle  is  certainly  legible  in  its  language, 
which  although  possessed  of  remarkable  facility  in  the  adap- 
tation of  foreign  terms  and  even  idioms  to  its  own  use,  is  at 
the  same  time  free  from  the  trammels  with  which  the  other 
languages  of  its  class  are  encumbered.  In  the  gender  of 
nouns,  for  instance,  we  meet  with  no  perplexity  or  anomaly, 
every  noun  being  masculine,  feminine  or  neuter,  according 
to  the  nature  of  the  object  or  idea  it  represents ;  and  as  the 
adjectives  are  all  indeclinable,  their  concordance  with  the 
noun  is  at  once  effected  without  the  apparently  useless 
trouble  of  altering  the  final  letters.  This  perfect  freedom 
from  useless  encumbrance  adds  greath^  to  the  ease  and 
vigor  of  expression. 

After  the  gradual  disappearance  of  the  Anglo-Saxon  and 
evolution  of  the  English  language,  the  Anglo-Saxon  versions 
became  useless  from  the  alteration  in  the  language,  and  until 
the  fourteenth  century  the  efforts  made  to  produce  a  new 
translation  were  few  and  feeble.  An  ecclesiastic  named 
Orm,  or  Ormin,  supposed  from  his  dialect  to  have  been  a 
native  of  the  North  of  England,  composed  a  metrical  para- 
phrase of  the  Gospels  and  Acts,  in  lines  of  fifteen  syllables, 
during  the  latter  part  of  the  twelfth  century.  This  work  is 
entitled  the  Ormulum,  from  the  name  of  its  author,  and  is 
preserved  in  the  Bodleian  Library.  A  more  extensive 
metrical  paraphrase,  comprising  the  Old  and  New  Testa- 
ments, is  to  be  found  amongst  other  poetry  of  a  religious 
nature  in  a  work  entitled  Sowle-hele  (Soul's  health),  belong- 
ing to  the  Bodleian  Library :  it  is  usually  ascribed  to  the  end 
of  the  twelfth  century.  Another  metrical  version,  probably 
of  the  same  date,  is  preserved  in  Corpus  Christi  College, 
Cambridge :  it  comprises  only  the  first  two  books  of  the  Old 


774  EARLY   ENGLISH   VERSIONS    OF   SCRIPTURE 

Testament,  and  is  written  in  the  dialect  then  spoken  in  the 
north  of  England.  In  the  same  college,  a  metrical  version 
of  the  Psalms,  apparently  written  about  the  year  1300,  has 
been  deposited:  this  version  adheres  to  the  Latin  Psalter, 
corrected  by  Jerome,  as  closely  as  the  nature  of  the  composi- 
tion will  admit.  Several  other  MSS.  of  the  old  English 
Psalter,  preserved  in  the  British  Museum  and  the  Bodleian 
Library,  are  supposed  to  be  exemplars  of  the  same  version, 
with  the  orthography  altered  in  conformity  with  the  state  of 
the  language  at  the  periods  in  which  they  were  written.  A 
translation  of  the  Psalms  from  the  same  text  (the  corrected 
Latin  of  Jerome),  was  executed  by  Richard  Rolle,  of  Ham- 
pole,  near  Doncaster,  during  the  early  part  of  the  fourteenth 
century.  This  version  is  remarkable  as  being  the  first  por- 
tion of  the  Scriptures  ever  translated  into  English  prose. 
Rolle,  or  Hampole  as  he  is  more  generally  called,  also  wrote 
a  paraphrase  in  verse  of  a  part  of  Job.  Two  other  versions 
of  the  Psalms,  belonging  to  the  same  period,  are  likewise 
extant.  In  Bene't  College,  Cambridge,  there  is  a  version  of 
Mark,  Luke  and  the  Pauline  Epistles,  but  the  translator 
and  the  date  are  unknown ;  and  in  the  British  Museum  there 
is  a  translation  of  the  Gospels  appointed  to  be  read  on  Sun- 
days, written  in  the  northern  dialect. 

A  version  has  been  commonly  ascribed  to  John  de  Tre- 
visa,  vicar  of  Berkeley  in  Gloucestershire,  who  flourished 
toward  the  close  of  the  fourteenth  century ;  but  he  only  trans- 
lated a  few  detached  passages,  which  he  introduced  in  certain 
parts  of  his  writings.  Some  texts  translated  by  him  were 
painted  on  the  walls  of  the  chapel  belonging  to  Berkeley 
Castle. 

A  popularly  believed  error  is  that  Wyclif  made  a  com- 
plete translation  of  the  whole  Bible  between  the  years  1378 
and  1382,  As  Blunt  {Plain  Account  of  the  English  Bible 
p.  1 7)  says :  **  The  name  of  Wyclife  has  been  used  as  a  peg  to 
hang  many  a  work  upon  with  which  the  owner  of  the  name 
had  nothing  whatever  to  do."  Sir  E.  Maunde  Thompson 
{Wy cliff  Exhibition  British  Museum  p.  XX)  says  that  only 
the  New  Testament  portion  can  be  said  probably  to  be  due 
to  the  hand  of  Wyclif  himself.     Of  the  other  portions  of  the 


EARLY   ENGLISH  VERSIONS   OF   SCRIPTURE  775 

version  the  same  eminent  authority  declares  that  ''Wyclif 
may  have  commenced  the  work  of  revision  but  he  did  not 
live  to  see  it  accomplished."  Blunt,  op.  cit.,  declares: 
''There  is  scarcely  any  contemporary  evidence,  except  that 
of  his  bitterest  opponent,  that  Wyclife  was  really  the  author 
of  this  translation,  but  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  tradition 
is  to  be  believed  when  it  associates  his  name  with  it.  ... 
The  popular  idea  of  Wyclife  sitting  alone  in  his  study  at 
Lutterworth,  and  making  a  complete  new  translation  of  the 
whole  Bible  with  his  own  hands  is  one  of  those  many 
popular  ideals  which  will  not  stand  the  test  of  historical 
inquiry." 

Dom.  Gasquet  believes  that  many  of  the  versions  popu- 
larly credited  to  Wyclif  were  made  by  Catholics.  {The 
Old  English  Bible) 

Certain  it  is  that  the  rdle  of  Wyclif  has  been  exag- 
gerated. That  the  Bible,  at  least  portions  of  it,  were  in  use 
in  the  vernacular  tongue  in  England  is  attested  by  the  best 
evidence. 

Sir  Thomas  More  [Dyalogues  (ed.  1530,)  p.  138]  is  a  most 
competent  witness: 

''As  for  old  translations,  before  WyclifEe's  time  (he 
writes),  they  remain  lawful  and  be  in  some  folks  hands. 
Myself  have  seen  and  can  show  you,  fair  and  old  Bibles,  in 
English  which  have  been  known  and  seen  by  the  Bishop  of 
the  Diocese  and  left  in  laymans  hands  and  womens. " 

Again,  in  another  place  he  says : — 

"The  whole  Bible  was  long  before  his  {i.e.,  Wycliffe's) 
days  by  virtuous  and  well  learned  men,  translated  into  the 
English  tongue  and  by  good  and  godly  people  with  devotion, 
and  soberness,  well  and  reverently  read." 

Cranmer  himself  in  his  prologue  to  the  second  edition  of 
the  "Great  Bible."  says: 

"  If  the  matter  should  be  tried  by  custom,  we  might  also 
allege  custom  for  the  reading  of  the  Scripture  in  the  vulgar 
tongue,  and  prescribe  the  more  ancient  custom.  For  it  is 
not  much  above  one  hundred  years  ago,  since  Scripture  hath 
not  been  accustomed  to  be  read  in  the  vulgar  tongue  within 
this  realm,  and  many  hundred  years  before  that,  it  was  trans- 


776  EARLY   ENGLISH   VERSIONS    OF   SCRIPTURE 

lated  and  read  in  the  Saxon's  tongue,  which  at  that  time  was 
our  mother  tongue,  and  when  this  language  waxed  old  and 
out  of  common  usage,  because  folk  should  not  lack  the  fruit 
of  reading,  it  was  again  translated  into  the  newer  language 
whereof  yet  also  many  copies  remain  and  be  daily  found." 

Foxe  the  Martyrologist  in  his  dedication  to  Arch- 
bishop Parker  of  his  edition  of  the  Saxon  Gospels  writes : 

"If  histories  be  well  examined  we  shall  find  both  before 
the  Conquest  and  after,  as  well  before  John  Wickliffe  was 
bom  as  since,  the  whole  body  of  the  Scriptures  was  by  sun- 
dry men  translated  into  our  country  tongue.  " 

Finally  it  is  proven  that  the  opposition  to  the  protestant 
versions  was  not  for  the  reason  that  they  translated  the 
Scriptures  into  the  vernacular,  but  that  they  brought  in 
false  opinions  into  doctrine. 

When  one  alleged  against  Sir  Thomas  More  that  the 
ecclesiastical  authorities  burned  all  the  protestant  versions, 
More  answered:  ''if  this  were  done  so,  it  were  not  well 
done;  but,"  he  continues  in  reply  to  one  who  had  asserted 
this,  * *I  believe  that  ye  mistake  it. ' '  And  taking  up  one  case 
objected  against  him  in  which  the  Bible  of  a  Lollard  prisoner 
named  Richard  Hun,  a  London  merchant,  was  said  to  have 
been  burnt  in  the  Bishop  of  London's  prison,  he  says: 

''This  I  remember  well,  that  besides  other  things  framed 
for  the  favour  of  divers  other  heresies  there  were  in  the  pro- 
logue of  that  Bible  such  words  touching  the  Blessed  Sacra- 
ment as  good  Christian  men  did  abhor  to  hear  and  that  gave 
the  readers  undoubted  occasion  to  think  that  the  book  was 
written  after  Wyclif 's  copy,  and  by  him  translated  into  our 
tongue,  and  that  this  Bible  was  destroyed  consequently  not 
because  it  was  in  English,  but  because  it  contained  gross  and 
manifest  heresy." 

"  In  some  editions  of  Tyndale's  New  Testament, "  writes 
the  Protestant  historian  Blunt,  "there  is  what  must  be 
regarded  as  a  wilful  omission  of  the  gravest  possible  char- 
acter, for  it  appears  in  several  editions,  and  has  no  shadow 
of  justification  in  the  Greek  or  Latin  of  the  passage  (i  Peter 
ii.  13,  14)."     (Blunt,  History  of  the  Reformation,  p.  514). 


EARLY   ENGLISH   VERSIONS    OF   SCRIPTURE  777 

''Green  in  his  History  (vol.  ii.,  pp.  127-8,)  though  by  no 
means  unfriendly  to  Tyndale  on  this  point,  writes  as  follows : 
— 'We  can  only  fairly  judge  their  action  by  viewing  it  in  the 
light  of  the  time.  What  Warham  and  More  saw  over  the 
sea  might  well  have  turned  them  from  a  movement  which 
seemed  breaking  down  the  very  foundations  of  religion  and 
society.  Not  only  was  the  fabric  of  the  Church  rent  asun- 
der, and  the  center  of  Christian  unity  denounced  as  'Baby- 
lon,' but  the  reform  itself  seemed  passing  into  anarchy. 
Luther  was  steadily  moving  onward  from  the  denial  of  one 
Christian  dogma  to  that  of  another;  and  what  Luther  still 
clung  to,  his  followers  were  ready  to  fling  away.  Meanwhile 
the  religious  excitement  was  kindling  wild  dreams  of  social 
revolution,  and  men  stood  aghast  at  the  horrors  of  a  peasant 
war  which  broke  out  in  Germany.  It  was  not,  therefore,  as 
a  mere  translation  of  the  Bible  that  Tyndale 's  work  reached 
England.  It  came  as  part  of  the  Lutheran  movement,  and 
it  bore  the  Lutheran  stamp  in  its  version  of  ecclesiastical 
words.  "Church"  became  "congregation";  'Spriest"  was 
changed  into  "elder."  We  can  hardly  wonder  that  More 
denounced  the  book  as  heretical,  or  that  Warham  ordered 
it  to  be  given  up  by  all  who  possessed  it. "  (Gasquet,  The 
Old  English  Bible,  footnote  pp.  130- 131.) 

In  1850  a  complete  edition  of  both  testaments  of  the 
version  commonly  called  Wyclif 's  was  published  at  Oxford 
under  the  editorship  of  J.  Farstall  and  Sir  F.  Madden. 

In  1388  John  Pumey  revised  Wyclif 's  translation. 
These  translations  were  based  on  the  Latin  Vulgate. 

In  1525  or  1526  Tyndale  published  a  translation  of  the 
New  Testament  at  Worms.  He  published  also  portions  of  a 
translation  of  the  Old  Testament.  Miles  Coverdale  con- 
tinued Tyndale 's  work,  and  in  1535  the  first  printed  English 
Bible  was  published. 

Other  translations  now  followed  rapidly,  the  best  known 
of  which  is  Matthew's  Bible.  Its  real  author  was  John 
Rogers,  alias  Thomas  Matthew.  From  Matthew's  Bible 
all  later  revisions  of  the  protestant  Bible  have  been  formed. 

In  1539  Richard,  Taverner  published  a  translation  of  the 
Bible. 


778  THE   REVISED   VERSION 

As  none  of  these  translations  pleased  Cromwell,  he  com- 
missioned Coverdale  to  bring  out  a  new  translation.  This 
is  called  "The  Great  Bible,"  published  in  1539. 

Cranmer's  Bible  was  published  in  1540,  and  five  other 
editions  followed  in  the  next  eighteen  months. 

As  Mary's  accession  had  arrested  the  progress  of  heresy 
in  England,  some  of  the  protestants  fled  to  Geneva.  There 
in  1557  Wm.  Whittingham  brought  out  the  N.  T.  Prin- 
cipally by  his  labors  a  translation  of  the  whole  Bible  was 
published  at  Geneva  in  1560.  This  is  called  the  Genevan 
Bible. 

This  version  is  sometimes  called  the  "Breeches  Bible," 
because  the  translators  rendered  the  n^"n^n  of  Genesis 
III.  7,  by  "breeches." 

As  Cromwell  and  Cranmer  were  opposed  to  the  Calvinism 
of  the  authors  of  this  edition,  in  1568  several  protestant 
bishops  revised  Coverdale 's  version.  This  is  known  as  the 
Bishops'  Bible. 

In  1604  King  James  of  England  convened  a  conference  to 
reform  things  amiss  in  the  Church.  In  the  second  day's 
conference  Dr.  Reynolds  declared  that  the  translations  of 
Scripture  made  in  the  days  of  Henry  VIII.  and  Edward  VI. 
"were  corrupt  and  not  answerable  to  the  truth  of  the  orig- 
inal. "  King  James  immediately  ordered  a  new  translation. 
It  was  begun  in  1607,  and  in  161 1  the  work  was  published. 
Forty-seven  revisers  were  appointed  for  the  work.  We 
know  but  little  of  the  history  of  their  work. 

This  edition  is  the  authorized  edition  of  the  protestant 
English  Bible.  None  of  these  versions  have  any  critical 
value. 

In  May  1870  the  work  of  revising  this  translation  was 
begun.  The  revision  of  the  New  Testament  was  completed 
in  about  ten  years  and  a  half,  and  was  published  in  1881. 
The  revision  of  the  Old  Testament  was  completed  in  1885. 
A  revised  translation  of  the  deuterocanonical  books  was 
published  in  1895.  The  New  Testament  differs  from  the 
edition  of  161 1  in  5788  places,  besides  numberless  minor 
differences. 


THE   RHEIMS-DOUAY   VERSION  779 

In  the  year  1582,  William  (afterward  Cardinal)  Allen, 
Gregory  Martin  and  Richard  Bristow  made  a  translation  of 
the  New  Testament  at  the  English  Catholic  college  of  Rheims 
under  the  following  title :  *   ; 

The  New  Testament  of  lesvs  Christ,  translated  faithfvlly 
into  English  out  of  the  authentical  Latin,  according  to  the 
best  corrected  copies  of  the  same,  diligently  conferred  with 
the  Greeke,  and  other  editions  in  diuers  languages:  Vvith 
Argvments  of  bookes  and  chapters,  Annotations,  and  other 
necessarie  helpes,  for  the  better  vnderstanding  of  the  text, 
and  specially  for  the  discouerie  of  the  Corrvptions  of  diuers 
late  translations,  and  for  cleering  the  Controversies  in  relig- 
ion, of  these  dales:  In  the  English  College  of  Rhemes. 
Printed  at  Rhemes  by  lohn  Fogny.     1582.  4to. 

Thomas  Worthington  affixed  the  notes  to  the  text. 
From  the  place  of  its  origin  it  was  called  the  Rheims  version. 
After  the  college  was  removed  to  Douay,  the  same  scholars 
translated  the  Old  Testament  under  the  title : 

The  Holie  Bible  faithfvlly  translated  into  English  ovt  of 
the  Avthentical  Latin.  Diligently  conferred  with  the 
Hebrew,  Greeke,  and  other  Editions  in  diuers  languages. 
With  Argvments  of  the  Bookes,  and  Chapters :  Annotations : 
Tables:  and  other  helpes  for  better  vnderstanding  of  the 
text :  for  discouerie  of  corrvptions  in  some  late  translations : 
and  for  clearing  Controversies  in  Religion.  By  the 
English  College  of  Doway  by  Lavrence  Kellam.  1609-10. 
2  vols.  4to. 

These  being  united  form  the  Rheims-Douay  Bible,  the 
"editio  princeps"  of  all  English  Catholic  versions.  In  1750 
it  was  revised  by  Dr.  Challoner,  and  this  revision  is  the  one 
usually  in  use. 

CHAPTER  XXVII. 
The  Interpretation  of  Scripture. 

In  the  acquisition  of  all  knowledge,  man  should  order  all 
its  different  branches  to  one  grand  scope :  namely,  to  develop 
the  powers  of  the  soul,  and  make  the  being  of  man  God-like. 
Now  in  that  cultivation  of  the  soul,  the  science  of  Holy  Scrip- 
ture is  most  immediate  to  the  end  of  all  study.     The  other 


780  THE   INTERPRETATION    OF    SCRIPTURE 

departments  of  human  knowledge  contain  but  the  faint  and 
broken  accents  of  human  reason ;  the  Holy  Scriptures  con- 
tain the  clear  voice  of  God  from  Heaven.  Hence  there 
should  also  be  this  order  in  the  human  knowable,  that  all  the 
sciences  should  be  subservient  to  the  study  of  God  in  the 
Holy  Scriptures. 

Man  should  study  the  different  sciences  with  the  view  of 
coming  closer  to  the  Creator  through  the  consideration  of 
his  works.  The  man,  then,  who  essays  to  interpret  the  word 
of  God,  should  bring  to  his  task  the  possession  of  vast  and 
varied  knowledge,  that  truth  may  beget  truth,  and  the  mes- 
sage of  the  Creator  may  be  received  in  its  fulness,  in  the  mind 
made  receptive  by  careful  preparation.  The  student  of 
Scripture  takes  up  the  grandest  and  sublimest  system  of 
philosophy,  the  truest  and  best  system  of  ethics,  and  the 
grand  basis  of  dogmatic  truth.  The  human  mind  is  limited, 
the  compass  of  its  cognitions  is  never  vast,  and  it  would  be 
presumption  in  it  to  undertake  to  find  the  sense  of  the  Holy 
Code  without  much  laborious  preparation.  A  man  with 
some  happy  faculty  of  expression  may  treat  of  many  themes 
of  human  knowledge  without  great  mental  application.  But 
if  a  man  would  draw  anything  more  than  pious  generalities 
out  of  the  Scriptures,  he  must  study. 

In  the  words  of  Jerome :     ''Agricolse,  casmentarii,   fabri, 
metallorum  lignorumve  csesores,  lanarii  quoque  et  fuUones, 
et  ceteri,  qui  variam.  supellectilem  et  vilia  opuscula  fabri- 
cantur,   absque  doctore,  esse  non  possunt  quod  cupiunt. 
Quod  medicorum  est, 

Promittunt  medici;  tractant  fabrilia  fabri. 

Sola  Scripturarum  ars,  quam  sibi  omnes  passim  vindicant: 

Scribimus  indocti  doctique  poemata  passim. 

Hanc  garrula  anus,  hanc  delirus  senex,  hanc  sophista  ver- 
bosus,  hanc  universi  prsesumunt,  lacerant,  decent,  antequam 
discant.  Alii  adducto  supercilio  grandia  verba  trutinantes 
inter  mulierculas  de  sacris  literis  philosophantur.  Alii  dis- 
cunt,  proh  dolor!  a  feminis,  quod  viros  doceant :  et  ne  parum 
hoc  sit,  quadam  facilitate  verborum,  imo  audacia  edisserunt 
aliis,  quod  ipsi  non  intelligunt ....  Puerilia  sunt  hsec  et 
circulatorum  ludo  similia,  docere  quod  ignores,  imo,  ut  cum 


THE   INTERPRETATION   OF   SCRIPTURE  781 

stomacho  loquar,  ne  hoc  quidem  scire,  quod  nescias."  (St. 
Hier.  ad  Paulin.  Ep.  53,  6,  7,  Migne,  P.  L.  22,  544.) 

The  student  of  Scripture  should  study  natural  science  to 
see  the  design  of  the  Creator  in  his  works,  and  the  evidence 
of  his  wisdom  in  Nature's  laws ;  and  also  to  defend  the  truths 
of  God  against  the  inflated  sophists,  who  speak  in  the  name 
of  science.  He  should  study  philosophy  that  by  the  pos- 
session of  the  truths  of  one  order,  the  mind  may  expand  and 
rise  by  the  right  laws  from  one  order  of  truth  to  another, 
in  its  upward  course  towards  the  Infinite  Truth. 

He  should  study  the  languages,  for  the  resources  of 
human  thought  are  expressed  in  the  different  languages  of 
the  races  of  man.  No  man  can  well  come  at  the  thought  of 
the  world  through  the  knowledge  of  any  one  tongue. 

He  should  study  the  tongues  in  which  the  holy  men  of 
God  spoke,  for  the  fulness  and  the  clearness  of  the  thought 
remains  in  the  original  tongue  in  which  it  was  first  delivered. 
It  will  not  suffice  to  say:  "Jerome  translated  the  Hebrew 
for  me,  and  as  I  can  not  equal  Jerome's  knowledge  of  Scrip- 
ture, I  shall  desist  from  fruitless  toil."  Neither  Jerome  nor 
any  other  man,  put  into  the  translation  the  fulness  and  the 
clearness  of  the  original. 

He  should  study  dogmatic  theology,  that  he  may  be 
guided  by  the  analogy  of  faith  in  all  interpretations.  It 
may  be  safely  stated  that  no  man  ever  became  an  able  inter- 
preter of  Scripture,  who  was  not  a  profound  dogmatic  theo- 
logian. 

He  should  study  archaeology,  that  he  may  know  the  cus- 
toms and  modes  of  life  of  ancient  people ;  for  a  knowledge  of 
these  will  throw  light  on  certain  expressions  of  such  people. 

It  is  an  evident  fact  that  the  science  of  archaeology  has 
made  remarkable  progress  in  our  times.  Remarkable  dis- 
coveries have  been  made  on  the  sites  of  Babylon,  in  Egypt, 
Palestine,  and  Greece,  and  these  monuments  bear  a  most 
important  relation  to  Holy  Scripture.  It  is  a  source  of 
satisfaction  to  every  believer  to  know  that  the  testimony  of 
the  monuments  has  confirmed  the  truth  of  the  Scriptures. 

The  student  of  Scripture  should  study  textual  criticism, 


782  THE    INTERPRETATION    OF   SCRIPTURE 

that  he  may  be  able  to  judge  of  the  sense  of  various  readings, 
and,  may  intelHgently  use  the  different  codices. 

Finally,  he  should  read  and  ponder  much  upon  the  Holy 
Text,  for  it  does  not  reveal  its  depths  of  truths  to  the  casual 
reader. 

In  proper  degree  the  common  laws  of  interpretation  for 
all  written  documents  are  applicable  to  Holy  Scripture ;  but 
inasmuch  as  the  Scriptures  form  a  unique  transcendent 
class  of  literature,  they  have  also  laws  proper  to  themselves. 

The  argument  or  occasion  of  the  writing  of  a  document 
often  determines  the  peculiar  sense  given  to  words  by  an 
inspired  writer.  Thus  a  knowledge  of  the  gnostic  heresies 
gives  us  the  key  to  St.  John's  anathema  against  the  man  who 
should  divide  Jesus  Christ. 

The  grammatical  and  logical  context  must  be  weighed ; 
for  both  the  words  and  the  ideas  of  a  writer  are  connected  in 
a  manner  affecting  the  sense.  Attention  must  also  be  paid 
to  the  character  of  the  writing ;  for  in  impassioned  discourse 
the  ideas  may  be  somewhat  disconnected. 

The  hermeneutical  laws  proper  to  the  Holy  Scriptures 
are  based  on  the  fact  that  God  is  the  Author  of  the  Scrip- 
tures. God  must  therefore  guide  the  interpretation  of  his 
writings. 

The  first  great  law  therefore  in  the  interpretation  of 
Scripture  is  the  teaching  of  the  Church. 

It  is  clear  that  the  nature  of  the  writings  demands  in  the 
soul  of  the  interpreter  certain  virtues  to  fit  it  to  receive 
God 's  message. 

Prayer,  an  honest  teachable  heart,  and  humility  are 
necessary:  "When  as  a  youth  I  sought  the  sense  of  the 
Scriptures  by  the  power  of  the  intellect  rather  than  by  pious 
petition,  by  my  perverse  method  I  closed  against  myself  the 
door  leading  to  the  Lord.  When  I  should  have  knocked 
that  it  might  be  opened,  I  caused  it  to  be  closed.  I  sought 
in  pride  what  only  the  humble  can  find.  .  .  .  Wretched 
man !  When  I  thought  myself  able  to  fly,  I  left  the  nest, 
and  I  fell  before  I  flew. "     (Aug.  Sermon  51,  5). 

All  the  Fathers  have  recognized  that  there  are  many 
things  difficult  to  understand  in  the  Scriptures.     To  deal 


THE   INTERPRETATION   OF   SCRIPTURE  783 

with  these  Origen  counsels :  "Being  assiduous  in  the  reading 
of  Scripture,  with  a  true  firm  faith  in  God  seek  the  sense  of 
the  Holy  Scriptures,  which  is  often  hidden. "  (Ep.  ad  Greg. 
Neoc.) 

A  most  useful  counsel  is  that  of  St.  Augustine: 
**  For  I  confess  to  your  charity  that  I  have  learned  to  yield 
this  respect  and  honor  only  to  the  canonical  books  of 
Scripture :  of  these  alone  do  I  most  firmly  believe  that  the 
authors  were  completely  free  from  error.  And  if  in  these 
writings  I  am  perplexed  by  anything  which  appears  to  me 
opposed  to  truth,  I  do  not  hesitate  to  suppose  that  either 
the  MS.  is  faulty,  or  the  translator  has  not  caught  the  mean- 
ing of  what  was  said,  or  I  myself  have  failed  to  understand 
it." 

As  St.  Paul  says:  *'The  natural  man  receiveth  not  the 
things  that  are  of  the  spirit  of  God :  for  they  are  foolishness 
to  him,  and  he  can  not  understand  them,  because  they  are 
spiritually  examined. " 

This  fact  underlies  rationalism  and  modernism;  men 
have  brought  in  false  theories  of  inspiration  and  interpreta- 
tion to  reduce  the  supernatural  character  of  the  Scriptures 
which  the  natural  man  finds  it  hard  to  understand.  The 
whole  tendency  it  to  make  the  Scriptures  more  acceptable  to 
the  natural  man.  Many  of  these  theories  have  been  treated 
of  in  our  tract  on  Inspiration.  The  Encyclical  *'  Providen- 
tissimus  Deus ' '  which  we  have  produced  in  full  is  an  excel- 
lent treatise  on  the  interpretation  of  Scripture.  Hence  we 
shall  refrain  from  repeating  here  what  has  been  treated  of  in 
the  first  part  of  our  work. 

The  Council  of  Trent  in  its  famous  decree  of  the  fourth 
session,  ''with  a  view  to  restrain  the  petulance  of  human 
minds,  decreed :  That  no  one  relying  on  his  own  judgment, 
in  the  doctrinal  and  moral  parts  of  Scripture,  should  distort 
the  Holy  Scriptures  to  conform  to  his  opinions  against  the 
sense  which  our  Holy  Mother  the  Church  has  held  and  holds, 
whose  ofiice  it  is  to  judge  of  the  true  sense  and  interpreta- 
tion of  Holy  Scripture ;  and  that  no  one  shall  dare  interpret 
the  same  Holy  Scriptures  contrary  to  the  unanimous  con- 
sensus of  the  Fathers. 


784  THE   INTERPRETATION   OF   SCRIPTURE 

Though  this  decree  is  formally  disciplinary  it  presup- 
poses a  dogmatic  truth. 

The  Vatican  Council  repromulgated  the  decree  of  the 
Council  of  Trent,  and  authentically  interpreted  it:  ** Since 
therefore  that  which  the  Council  of  Trent  wisely  decreed  to 
restrain  rash  minds  in  the  interpretation  of  Holy  Scripture, 
has  by  some  men  been  falsely  interpreted,  we  renew  the 
aforesaid  decree,  and  declare  its  meaning  to  be  that  in  mat- 
ters of  faith  and  morals  pertaining  to  Christian  teaching 
that  is  to  be  held  as  the  true  sense  of  Holy  Scripture  which 
holy  Mother  the  Church  has  held  and  holds;  for  her  ofhce 
it  is  to  judge  of  the  sense  and  interpretation  of  the  Holy 
Scriptures.  Therefore  it  is  not  allowed  to  any  man  to  in- 
terpret the  Holy  Scriptures  against  the  sense  (of  the  Church) 
or  against  the  unanimous  consent  of  the  Fathers."  (Const, 
de  Fide.  II.) 

The  Fathers  of  the  Vatican  have  here  brought  into  the 
decree  the  dogmatic  fact  on  which  the  disciplinary  ruling 
of  the  Council  of  Trent  was  based,  and  have  promulgated  a 
dogmatic  decree.  A  long  series  of  discussions  preceded  the 
definition,  and  it  is  made  evident  from  these  that  the  decree 
does  not  contemplate  two  disparate  criterions ;  but  held  the 
unanimous  consent  of  the  Fathers  to  be  a  competent  witness 
of  what  the  Church  held. 

The  sense  of  some  texts  has  been  directly  defined  by  the 
Church.  It  was  defined  by  the  Council  of  Trent,  that  Paul 
spoke  of  original  sin,  Rom.  V.  12.  (Cone.  Trid.  Sess.  V. 
2-4.)  It  was  defined  in  the  same  session,  and  again  in  the 
seventh  session,  that  the  sense  of  the  text,  John  III.  5, 
establishes  the  necessity  of  baptism  by  natural  water.  In 
the  thirteenth  session  it  is  established,  that  the  words  of  in- 
institution  of  the  Blessed  Eucharist  prove  the  real  presence 
of  Christ  in  the  Host.  In  the  fourteenth  session  it  is  de- 
fined that  the  words  of  Christ  in  John  XX.  23,  convey  the 
power  of  binding  and  loosing  sin ;  and  that  James  V.  1 1  pro- 
mulgates the  Sacrament  of  Extreme  Unction. 

The  indirect  force  of  the  Church's  definitions  pervades 
the  whole  body  of  the  Scriptures.  In  condemning  heresies, 
she  shows  us  indirectly  what  is  the  sense  of  many  passages ; 


THE   INTERPRETATION   OF   SCRIPTURE  785 

and  her  authentic  teaching  forms  a  general  norm  of  inter- 
pretation which  we  call  the  analogy  of  faith. 

We  may  define  the  analogy  of  faith  to  be  the  constant 
and  perpetual  harmony  of  Scripture  in  the  fundamental  points 
of  faith  and  practice,  deduced  from  those  passages,  in  which 
they  are  discussed  by  the  inspired  writer,  either  directly 
or  expressly,  and  in  clear,  plain,  and  intelligible  language. 
Or,  more  briefly,  the  analogy  of  faith  may  be  defined  to  be 
that  proportion  which  the  doctrines  of  the  Holy  Scriptures 
hear  to  each  other,  or,  the  close  connection  between  the  truths  of 
Revealed  Religion. 

The  analogy  of  faith  is  an  expression  borrowed  from 
Saint  Paul's  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  (XII.  6.)  where  he 
exhorts  those  who  prophesy  in  the  church  (that  is,  those  who 
exercise  the  office  of  authoritatively  expounding  the  Scrip- 
tures), to  prophesy  according  to  the  analogy  of  faith. 

The  clause,  ''in  rebus  fidei  et  morum,''  occasioned  much 
discussion  in  the  Council,  and  has  occasioned  much  since. 
By  this  clause  the  Fathers  did  not  restrict  inspiration  to  the 
doctrinal  parts ;  but  only  declared  that  in  these  parts,  the 
sense  was  vital  to  the  religious  life  of  the  people,  and 
consequently  in  these  things  the  Church  fulfilled  her  com- 
mission of  teaching  all  peoples. 

As  Bishop  Gasser  of  Brixen,  one  of  the  leading  bishops 
of  the  Council  declared,  the  Church  has  the  right  of  regula- 
ting the  interpretation  of  all  the  things  in  Scripture,  but, 
"regarding  the  historical  parts,  either  the  interpretations  are 
not  against  the  dogma  of  the  inspiration  of  Holy  Scripture 
and  of  all  its  parts,  or  they  are  against  this  dogma.  In  the 
first  hypothesis  it  is  a  free  ground  of  discussion;  in  the 
second  hypothesis,  if  the  interpretation  of  the  historical 
truth  violates  the  dogma  of  inspiration,  certainly  it  be- 
comes a  matter  of  faith,  and  hence  the  Church  has  the  right 
to  pass  judgment  on  it."     (Coll.  lac.  VII.  226.) 

Hence  all  the  parts  of  the  Holy  Scripture  are  inspired, 
but  the  inspired  sense  of  all  is  not  so  clearly  known  by  us. 
In  the  necessary  things  of  faith  and  morals,  the  Church 
exercises  a  special  care  to  help  us  to  come  at  the  inspired 
sense.  In  other  things,  though  they  are  equally  inspired, 
50  (H.S.) 


786  THE   INTERPRETATION    OF   SCRIPTURE 

she  leaves  the  interpretation  free,  on  condition  that  it  con- 
flict not  with  the  fundamental  dogma  of  the  inspiration  of 
the  whole  Scriptures.  When  the  Church  explicitly  inter- 
prets a  passage,  we  call  it  an  authentic  interpretation. 

While  therefore  we  recognize  that  there  is  a  wide  range 
of  truths  of  Scripture  where  men  may  freely  exercise  their 
scientific  methods,  we  see  at  the  same  time  that  the  great 
fundamental  truth  must  underlie  all  these  interpretations, 
namely  that  all  parts  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  as  they  came 
from  the  inspired  writers  are  divinely  inspired.  We  have 
already  discussed  in  the  treatise  on  Inspiration  the  false 
argument  of  those  who  wished  to  establish  non-inspired 
parts  in  Holy  Scripture. 

Concerning  the  sense  of  Scripture  a  few  principles  will 
suffice. 

When  we  speak  of  the  sense  of  a  writing,  we  mean  not  the 
mere  signification  of  the  words.  The  signification  of  a  word 
is  the  power  that  it  has  from  its  own  nature,  and  the  institu- 
tion and  use  of  man  to  convey  a  determinate  idea.  Hence 
one  term  can  have  many  significations.  But  the  sense  of  a 
word  is  the  actual  value  that  the  term  has  in  a  particular 
predication ;  and  the  sense  in  a  right  ordered  proposition  can 
be  but  one. 

The  first  and  main  sense  of  Scripture  is  the  literal  sense. 
Usage  prevails  to  class  under  this  head  the  historical  sense, 
and  the  metaphorical  sense.  "  By  the  literal  sense  a  thought 
may  be  expressed  in  two  ways:  that  is,  either  according  to 
the  ordinary  force  of  the  words,  as  when  I  say,  'the  man 
laughs' ;  or  according  to  a  simile,  as  when  I  say,  'the  mead- 
ow laughs.'  We  use  both  manners  of  expression  in  Scrip- 
ture, as  when  we  say  according  to  the  first  mode,  'Jesus 
ascended':  we  say,  'he  sits  at  the  right  hand  of  God,' 
according  to  the  second  mode.  And  therefore  under  the 
literal  sense  is  included  the  metaphorical."  (St.  Thomas 
in  Gal.  4.  7). 

Now  the  sense  of  Scripture  is  that  thought  which  the 
Holy  Ghost  has  expressed  by  written  words. 

The  historical  sense  is  that,  which  results  immediately 
from  the  ordinar>^  force  of  the  words,  as  when  I  say:   "The 


THE   INTERPRETATION   OF   SCRIPTURE  787 

Word  was  made  flesh. "  This  is  the  basic  sense  in  all  Scrip- 
ture, and  in  all  the  expressions  of  the  creations  of  mind. 

The  metaphorical  sense  of  Scripture  is  a  deviation  from 
the  ordinary  application  of  words,  in  which  we  predicate 
concepts  of  objects,  not  proper  to  them  in  their  essential 
nature,  but  founded  in  some  wide  general  similarity.  Thus 
we  speak  of  the  ''arm  of  the  Lord"  not  to  predicate  the  cor- 
poral member  of  God,  but  to  assert  of  him  the  power  of 
action. 

We  include  under  the  heading  of  metaphorical  sense  of 
Scripture,  all  figurative  sense,  whether  it  consist  in  simile, 
parable,  personification,  allegory,  synecdoche,  metonymy, 
apostrophe,  irony,  hyperbole,  or  other  figure.  The  main 
office  of  figurative  speech  in  Scripture  is  to  heighten  the  force 
of  the  enunciation,  to  give  clearness  to  abstract  ideas,  and  to 
express  ideas  with  something  of  the  fulness  and  vividness  of 
the  objects  of  sense. 

The  state  of  a  man  perplexed  by  many  thoughts,  could 
scarcely  be  better  expressed  than  by  saying : 

"I  scarcely  understand  my  own  intent; 
But  silkworm  like,  so  long  within  have  wrought, 
That  I  am  lost  in  my  own  web  of  thought. ' ' 

The  allegory  is  a  common  form  of  Scriptural  figure.  It  is 
a  form  of  expression  in  which  the  real  subject  is  not  men- 
tioned but  described  by  a  consistent,  intelligible  statement, 
and  the  subject  is  left  to  be  inferred  by  the  aptly  suggestive 
likeness.     A  fine  allegory  is  in  Isaiah  V.  1-2 : 

**  My  beloved  hath  a  vineyard  in  a  very  fruitful  hill ;  and 
he  fenced  it,  and  gathered  out  the  stones  thereof,  and  planted 
it  with  the  choicest  vine,  and  built  a  tower  in  the  midst  of  it, 
and  also  made  a  wine-press  therein;  and  he  looked  that  it 
should  bring  forth  grapes,  and  it  brought  forth  wild  grapes." 

The  parable  was  much  used  by  the  Lord.  This  figure  of 
speech  is  properly  a  species  of  allegory,  in  which  a  religious 
truth  is  exhibited  by  means  of  facts  from  nature  and  human 
life.  The  statements  are  not  historically  true,  but  are 
offered  as  a  means  of  conveying  a  higher  general  truth.  But 
the  propositions  are  always  true  to  nature ;  the  laws  of  the 
nature    of   the    different    beings    introduced,    are    strictly 


788  THE   INTERPRETATION"   OF   SCRIPTURE 

observed,  and  the  events  are  such  as  might  have  taken 
place.  The  Prodigal  Son,  The  Sower,  The  Ten  Virgins, 
Lazarus  and  Dives,  are  good  examples  of  this  form  of 
expression. 

The  knowledge  of  the  sense  of  Scripture,  has  been  much 
obscured  by  the  addition  of  what  is  called  the  sensus 
consequens. 

Such  is  the  nature  of  the  mind,  that  it  evolves  truth  from 
truth  by  logical  process.  The  truths  which  are  by  logical 
deduction  drawn  from  other  truths  of  Scripture,  are  by  some 
writers  classed  under  the  sensus  consequens.  Since  God 
endowed  man  with  the  reasoning  faculty,  it  is  natural  and 
right  for  him  to  proceed  in  syllogistic  process  from  truth  to 
truth.  And  if  the  fundamental  position  be  the  sense  of  the 
Holy  Ghost,  and  the  logical  process  be  legitimate,  the  con- 
clusion will  be  equally  the  sense  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  While, 
therefore,  we  justify  the  process,  we  see  no  need  of  multiply- 
ing entia  by  placing  this  division  of  the  sense  of  Scripture. 

As  the  infinite  knowledge  of  God  comprehends  all  future 
things  and  events,  he  alone  can  order  a  being  or  event  to 
prefigure  some  future  being  or  event.  This  prefiguring  of 
future  beings,  actions,  and  events  is  called  the  typical  or 
spiritual  sense  of  Scripture.  It  is  evident  that  it  can  only  be 
properly  verified  in  inspired  writings,  for  no  other  being  can 
thus  comprehend  and  describe  the  future. 

The  TYPICAL  SENSE  is  therefore  verified  when  some  being, 
action,  or  event  which  has  its  own  proper  mode  of  being,  is 
taken  to  signify  some  future  ens.  Therefore  the  typical 
sense  is  founded  upon  the  literal  sense.  It  leaves  to  the  sen- 
tence its  proper  literal  sense,  and  is  formed  upon  it  by  apply- 
ing the  great  leading  concept  of  the  present  reality  to  future 
being.  It  is  evident  that  it  differs  from  the  metaphorical 
sense,  though  it  comes  close  to  allegory.  But  it  is  distin- 
guishable from  allegory  in  this,  that  it  imports  as  its  basis 
some  real  existing  being,  whereas  allegory  is  the  application 
of  an  imaginary  ens  to  signify  present  or  future  truth.  Thus 
the  ten  virgins  can  not  be  called  a  type  of  the  kingdom  of 
Heaven,  but  an- allegorical ''description  of  the  different  relig- 
ious conditions  of  human  life,  in  its  journey  towards  eternity. 


THE   INTERPRETATION   OF   SCRIPTURE  789 

The  typical  sense  is  also  different  in  nature  from  the  sense 
of  the  symbolic  actions  of  prophetic  vision.  The  vision  of 
Ezekiel,  I.  4-28,  for  example,  was  not  a  type  of  the  Almighty, 
but  a  symbol  of  some  of  his  attributes.  Thus  also  the 
Woman  seen  by  John  in  the  Apocalypse,  XII.,  is  not  a  type 
of  the  Church,  but  the  life  of  the  militant  Church  there  por- 
trayed by  symbolic  vision. 

The  type  is  properly  built  on  some  ens  in  rerum  natura; 
the  symbol  is  only  a  creation  of  the  mind. 

Usage  has  determined  that  the  ens  adumbrating  the 
future  verity  should  be  called  the  type,  while  the  future 
verity  thus  prefigured  is  called  the  antitype. 

The  old  writers  here  again  induce  useless  divisions,  divid- 
ing types  into  prophetic,  which  relate  to  Christ,  anagogic 
which  regard  man's  supernatural  destiny,  and  tropologic, 
which  contain  laws  of  morality.  These  divisions  serve  no 
useful  purpose. 

The  existence  of  types  in  the  Scripture  is  self-evident 
from  the  reading  of  the  Holy  Books.  Adam  is  called  a  type 
of  Christ,  TVTTo?  Tov  ixeWovTo^,  Rom.  V.  14;  the  sacrifice 
of  Melchisedech  is  a  type  of  the  Eucharist ;  Sara  and  Hagar 
are  types  of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments,  Gal.  IV.  24;  the 
Paschal  Lamb  was  a  type  of  the  Crucifixion,  Exod.  XII.  46, 
compared  with  Jo.  XIX.  36 ;  the  Brazen  Serpent  was  a  type 
of  the  Vicarious  Atonement,  Num.  XXI.  9 ;  the  Manna  was  a 
type  of  the  Eucharist,  Exod.  XVI.  15,  compared  with  Jo.  VI. 
49-50;  Israel  in  the  Exodus  was  a  type  of  Christianity, 
ravra  Be  TVinK(a<;  avveffaivev  eKelvoi^^  I.  Cor.  X.  11.  Such 
evident  proofs  render  the  existence  of  the  typical  sense 
as  well  founded  as  the  existence  of  inspiration. 

From  the  express  declarations  of  the  inspired  writers,  and 
from  the  nature  of  the  truths  themselves,  it  is  evident  that 
the  entire  Old  Testament  with  its  history  and  its  rites  is  a 
type  of  the  New.  Thus  Moses  and  Joshua  are  types  of 
Christ,  the  Ark  of  Noah  a  type  of  the  Church,  the  old  sacri- 
fices a  type  of  the  Eucharist,  etc.,  but  it  is  absurd  to  seek 
this  typology  in  every  individual  proposition.  This  has 
been  done  even  to  the  extent  of  finding  a  typical  significa- 
tion in  the  snuffers  used  to  remove  the  snuff  from  the  candles 


790  THE  INTERPRETATION   OF   SCRIPTURE 

in  the  temple.  The  vanity  of  such  position  is  very  evident. 
There  is  much  in  the  first  Code  that  has  only  its  plain 
historical  sense,  such  as,  for  instance,  the  Decalogue. 

The  question  has  been  moved  by  some,  whether  there 
are  types  in  the  New  Testament.  This  question  admits  of  a 
definite  and  certain  answer. 

There  are  no  Messianic  types  in  the  New  Dispensation 
as  there  were  in  the  Old,  which  was  but  the  shadow  of  the 
perfect  covenant.  But  still,  as  the  Church  was  a  future  ens 
in  the  time  of  Christ,  there  were  typical  actions  in  his  life; 
and  certain  events  connected  with  his  first  coming  are 
t3rpical  of  their  counterparts  in  his  second  coming.  Thus 
St.  Paul  finds  a  typical  ratio  in  the  fact  that  Christ  suffered 
death  outside  the  gate ;  the  bark  of  the  Apostles,  tossed  by 
the  tempest,  is  a  type  of  the  Church,  and  the  destruction  of 
Jerusalem  is  most  certainly  a  type  of  the  dissolution  of  the 
world. 

Now  of  the  senses  of  Scripture,  the  greatest  and  most 
valuable  is  the  literal  sense.  This  should  be  first  sought  in 
every  passage  of  Scripture. 

In  every  enunciation  of  Holy  Scripture  there  is  a  literal 
sense,  whether  it  be  historical  or  metaphorical.  This  law 
of  interpretation  is  now  received  by  all.  It  was  opposed  by 
Origen  in  his  excessive  mysticism ;  but  the  Fathers  repud- 
iated his  extravagant  theories  as  "old  women's  fables," 
"aniles  fahulcB.''  (St.  Basil)  The  very  nature  of  human 
speech  demands  that  words  be  used  in  their  historical  or 
metaphorical  literal  sense.  In  no  other  supposition  is 
human  speech  intelligible ;  and  it  is  not  to  be  supposed  that 
God  violated  the  nature  of  human  speech  in  his  message  to 
man. 

A  question  of  more  difficult  solution  is  whether  a  sentence 
of  Holy  Scripture  may  have  more  than  one  literal  sense. 
Augustine  (Conf.  12,  30,  31,  32.)  concedes  the  possibility  of 
a  multiplex  sense  of  Scripture.  St.  Thomas  seems  to  have 
contradicted  himself  in  his  treatment  of  this  question.  In 
the  Summa  (I.  q.  i.  a.  10)  he  places  the  objection  "that  a 
multiplex  sense  of  Scripture  would  create  confusion  and 
error,  and  destroy  the  certitude  of  the  argument :"  he  answers 


THE  INTERPRETATION   OF   SCRIPTURE  791 

that  such  results  can  not  follow,  since  ''all  the  senses  are 
founded  on  the  one  literal  sense."  Nevertheless  a  little 
farther  on  he  writes :  "Since  the  literal  sense  is  that  which 
the  author  intends,  and  the  Author  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  is 
God,  who  comprehends  all  things  in  his  knowledge,  it  is  not 
unfitting,  as  St.  Augustine  says,  that  there  may  be  a  multi- 
plex literal  sense  of  Scripture. "  In  his  treatise  De  Potentia, 
q.  4,  he  is  still  more  explicit  in  defending  a  multiplex  sense. 
A  multiplex  literal  sense  is  also  taught  by  Melchior  Canus, 
Catharinus,  Bellarmine,  Bonfrere,  Serarius,  Salmeron, 
Molina,  Valentia,  and  Vasquez. 

The  tendency  of  later  writers  has  been  quite  generally 
opposed  to  admitting  a  multiplex  sense,  for  internal 
reasons.  Thus  Schmid  (De  Insp.  248)  declares  that  the 
greater  weight  of  authority  is  for  it;  the  stronger  internal 
evidence  is  against  it.     He  leaves  the  question  undecided. 

Those  who  hold  the  negative  opinion  argue  that  it  is  the 
nature  of  human  speech  that  there  be  but  one  literal  sense 
in  a  proposition,  and  the  inspired  writers  acting  under  the 
influence  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  are  not  to  be  supposed  to  have 
changed  the  nature  of  human  discourse.  In  fact  the  under- 
standing of  the  Scriptures  would  be  much  impeded,  if  more 
than  one  literal  sense  was  contained  in  them,  for  one,  after 
receiving  one  certain  literal  sense,  would  be  ever  uncertain 
whether  there  were  not  others  yet  to  be  explored. 

Now  it  must  be  understood  that  the  advocates  of  a 
multiplex  sense  of  Scripture,  Augustine  excepted,  admit  it 
only  in  rare  cases,  especially  in  prophetic  utterance  where 
God  directly  speaks.  They  believe  that  his  infinite  compre- 
hension of  truth  may  give  a  comprehensive  meaning  to 
expressions,  which  might  in  a  certain  sense,  be  called  a  multi- 
plex sense  of  Scripture.  There  is  a  certain  relation  between 
these  senses,  but  it  is  not  clear  in  every  case  that  they  can  be 
reduced  to  the  relation  of  type  and  antitype.  We  have  no 
wish  to  insist  on  the  name  ''multiplex  sense";  but  there 
seem  to  be  a  few  places  in  prophecy  where  two  entities  alike 
in  nature  are  contemplated  in  one  proposition.  In  such 
cases  the  declaration  of  St.  Thomas  seems  to  be  applicable : 
"A  term  is  ambiguous,  and  furnishes  an  occasion  of  decep- 


792  THE   INTERPRETATION   OF   SCRIPTURE 

tion  when  it  is  used  to  signify  many  things  of  which  one  is 
not  coordinated  to  the  other;  but  when  it  signifies  many 
things  which  by  a  certain  order  are  contemplated  as  one, 
then  the  term  is  not  ambiguous  but  certain."  Summa 
Th.  III.  q.  60,  a.  3). 

A  remarkable  instance  of  the  mode  in  which  the  same 
proposition  may  have  two  senses  is  furnished  in  the  Gospel  of 
St.  John  XL  50:  ''Ye  know  nothing  at  all,  nor  do  ye  take 
account  that  it  is  expedient  for  you  that  one  man  should 
die  for  the  people,  and  that  the  whole  nation  perish  not. " 

Caiaphas  gave  a  counsel  that  it  was  a  wise  political 
expedient  to  put  Jesus  to  death  to  please  Rome.  The  Holy 
Ghost  made  use  of  him  as  the  high  priest  to  prophesy  that 
Jesus  must  die  for  the  redemption  of  men. 

Now  it  is  true  that  Caiaphas  was  not  in  the  real  sense  a 
prophet,  but  this  passage  at  least  shows  that  it  is  compatible 
with  the  laws  of  human  speech,  as  the  Holy  Ghost  used  it, 
that  one  proposition  should  have  a  multiplex  sense.  There 
is  only  one  sense  here  intended  by  the  Holy  Ghost ;  but  we 
can  conceive  a  similar  case  where  a  human  writer  might 
express  a  holy  and  true  thought,  and  one  inspired  by  the 
Holy  Ghost,  an(9.  yet  unconsciously  utter  a  deeper  prophecy. 
The  sublime  passage  of  Isaiah  LII.,  4-6,  certainly  refers 
to  our  redemption  from  sin;  but  Matthew  (VIII.  16-17) 
applies  it  also  to  Jesus'  healing  of  the  sick.  The  only  just 
explanation  here  is  that  the  comprehensive  sense  of  prophecy 
contemplated  both  Jesus'  redemption  of  the  world  from  sin, 
and  his  merciful  healing  of  the  sick.  The  two  effects  are 
essentially  related.  This  theory  may  be  applied  to  other 
prophetic  places. 

Care  must  be  taken  not  to  receive  the  error  of  Origen, 
who  defended  that  at  times  only  the  typical  sense  was 
intended.  The  typical  sense  stands  not  alone,  but  is  always 
built  upon  the  literal.  The  Fathers  have  at  times  extolled 
the  typical  sense  above  the  literal,  on  the  assumption  that  it 
treated  of  higher  concepts.  This  is  erroneous.  The  typical 
sense  is  more  sublime  in  those  passages  in  which  it  is  found 
than  its  type,  but  it  is  not  more  sublime  than  the  literal 
sense  in  general.     The  typical  sense  of  the  passage  relating  to 


THE  INTERPRETATION   OF   SCRIPTURE  793 

the  Paschal  Lamb  is  more  sublime  than  its  type,  but  it  is  not 
more  sublime  than  the  declaration  of  St.  John :  "  The  Word 
was  made  flesh  and  dwelt  amongst  us,"  or  the  Beatitudes; 
and  these  are  to  be  accepted  in  their  literal  sense.  There- 
fore, where  there  is  a  typical  sense  it  is  to  be  principally 
sought,  because  it  was  in  such  passage  principally  intended 
by  the  Holy  Ghost ;  but  the  great  body  of  the  Scriptures 
especially  of  the  New  Testament  contain  their  truths  in  the 
literal  sense.  The  excessive  looking  wide  of  the  literal  sense 
in  search  of  types  is  one  of  the  great  defects  of  pulpit  use 
of  Holy  Scripture. 

Finally  the  typical  sense  of  any  passage  can  only  be  cer- 
tainly known,  by  some  authentic  declaration  of  the  Holy 
Ghost.  The  ordering  of  one  ens  to  signify  another  is  the 
work  of  God,  and  can  only  be  fully  known  to  us  through 
some  manifestation  of  the  mind  of  God.  Therefore,  we  can 
only  found  things  which  are  of  faith  on  those  types,  whose 
typical  signification  has  been  opened  up  to  us  by  some 
inspired  writer.  When  this  is  done,  it  is  evident  that  the 
sense  is  as  certain  as  the  literal  sense. 

In  the  liturgical  offices  of  the  Church,  and  in  the  writings 
of  the  Fathers,  often  a  passage  of  Scripture  is  applied  to  an 
object,  which  was  not  in  the  mind  of  the  inspired  writer,  nor 
comprehended  in  the  scope  of  the  Holy  Ghost  in  the  inspired 
writing.  This  is  called  tbe  accommodated  sense.  It  is 
based  upon  some  resemblance  between  the  two  themes. 

To  speak  properly,  it  is  not  a  sense  of  Scripture,  but  the 
adaptation  of  the  sense  of  Scripture  to  another  theme  of  simi- 
lar nature.  This  accommodation  takes  place  in  two  dif- 
ferent ways. 

The  first  species  occurs  where  the  passage  retains  its 
real  signification,  but  is  extended  to  another  theme,  which  is 
analogous  in  nature  and  circumstances.  Thus  a  man  who 
falls  in  temptation  may  say :  "  Serpens  decepit  me.  "  Thus, 
the  Breviary  applies  to  the  Holy  Pontiffs,  what  was  said  by 
the  Siracida  of  Noah:  "Inventus  est  Justus,  et  in  tempore 
iracundiag  f actus  est  reconciliatio. "  In  the  same  manner, 
■  the  Breviary  extends  to  Holy  Pontiffs,  what  was  said 
of  Moses :  "  Similem  fecit  ilium  in  gloria  Sanctorum ; "  and  of 
Aaron :  "  Statuit  ei  testament um  seternum. ' ' 


794  THE   INTERPRETATION   OF   SCRIPTURE 

This  use  of  Scripture  is  legitimate  and  useful,  provided 
always  the  first  sense  is  not  obscured,  and  the  application  is 
justly  made,  but  it  is  never  to  be  taken  as  the  sense  of  Holy 
Writ ;  it  can  never  prove  a  dogma.  Even  the  material  words 
of  Holy  Scripture  possess  a  sort  of  divine  virtue.  And  when 
they  become  the  vehicles  of  even  human  thoughts,  they  are 
capable  of  moving  the  soul  of  man  to  piety. 

The  second  species  of  accommodation  is  founded  in  no 
real  similarity  in  nature  or  circumstances  of  the  two  themes, 
but  in  a  mere  ignorant  distortion  of  Scriptural  words  to 
express  some  human  thought.  Thus,  when  Yahveh  showed 
visible  signs  of  his  majesty  in  certain  places,  the  Psalmist 
cried  out:  "Deus  mirabilis  in  Sanctis  suis  (in  Sanctuario 
suo). "  "  O  God,  thou  art  terrible  in  thy  holy  places. "  It  is 
not  uncommon  to  apply  this  to  the  mysterious  ways  of  God 
to  his  elect,  or  even  to  the  idiosyncrasies  of  holy  people. 
Again  in  Psalm  XVni.  26,  (Hebrew)  the  Psalmist  declares 
the  action  of  God  towards  man  to  be  fashioned  by  the  quali- 
ties of  a  man's  own  life:  'Xum  sancto  sanctus  eris,  et  cum 
perverso  perverteris.  "  It  is  lamentable  to  hear  a  man  tear 
this  text  to  tatters,  to  prove  the  ill  effect  of  evil  associations. 

It  is  related  that  after  the  Duke  of  Montmorency  was 
executed  by  the  order  of  Cardinal  Richelieu,  the  sister  of  the 
Duke,  passing  the  tomb  of  the  Cardinal,  directed  to  him  an 
apostrophe  in. the  words  of  Martha,  the  sister  of  Lazarus: 
"Domine,  si  fuisses  hie,  frater  meus  non  fuisset  mortuus." 
It  was  much  in  vogue  in  the  sixteenth  century  to  apply  the 
sacred  words  to  profane  subjects. 

When  St.  Francis  de  Sales  lay  ill,  his  physician  in  com- 
pounding some  micdicine  for  him,  addressed  him  thus: 
''Quod  ego  facio,  tu  nescis  modo ;  scies  autem  postea. "  Jo. 
XIII.  7 .  St.  Francis  reprehended  him  saying :  ''You  profane 
the  Scripture  of  God  in  applying  it  to  profane  things.  The 
Scripture  should  only  be  used  of  holy  themes,  and  with  pro- 
found respect. ' '  So  great  was  the  abuse,  that  the  Council 
of  Trent  in  its  fourth  session  formally  forbade  that  the 
Scripture  be  applied  to  profane  subjects. 


JEWISH   INTERPRETATION  795 

Chapter  XXVIII. 
Jewish  Interpretation. 

Through  defect  of  documents,  we  know  nothing  of  the 
exegetical  systems  of  the  Jews  before  the  time  of  Christ. 

Flavius  Josephus  declares  (War  I.  5,  2.)  that  the  Phari- 
sees interpret  the  Law  accurately.  We  can  only  come  at  a 
knowledge  of  their  system  through  the  Talmud,  which 
reflects  the  Jewish  thought  of  the  early  ages. 

The  Talmud  is  a  composite  form  of  the  Mishna  and  the 
Gemara.     The  Mishna,  from   r\^\^f  ^^s  the  radical  signifi- 

T  T 

cation  of  D enter 0 sis,  a  repetition  of  the  Law,  it  being  a 
repetition  and  explanation  of  the  Law.  In  the  Mishna  itself 
we  read: — ''Why  is  it  called  the  Mishna?  Because  it  is  the 
second  Law.  For  the  first  Law  which  Israel  received  on 
Sinai,  is  the  written  Law.  But  Moses  received  the  Mishna 
from  the  mouth  of  the  Almighty  the  second  time,  and  it  is 
the  oral  Law.  It  is  called  Mishna  because  it  is  second  to  the 
first  Law. "  It  is  certain  that  the  Mosaic  origin  of  the  Mishna 
is  a  fable.  It  is  simply  a  collection  of  the  opinions  and  legal 
decisions  of  the  ancient  Rabbis.  Chief  among  those  who 
collected  the  data  of  the  Mishna,  was  Rabbi  Jehuda  Hak- 
kadosh,  or  the  Holy,  bom  about  the  middle  of  the  second 
century.  The  Mishna  summed  up  all  previous  rabbinical 
labors,  and  moulded  all  the  subsequent  philosophy  and 
theology  of  Judaism.  Rabbinic  interpretation  is  called  by 
the  generic  term  of  2^''n*IO  Midrash  from  ^'^1,  to  enquire. 

These  Midrashim  are  of  two  kinds,  the  Haggadah,    ni^H 

T  T  - 

from  n;|j,  to  narrate,   was   a   free  exposition,  inclining  to 

~T 

allegory  and  mysticism,  and  generally  aimed  to  console  the 
saddened  spirit.  This  was  preferred  by  the  Jews  in  the 
dreadful  calamities  which  befell  them.  The  other  species  is 
r{^hr\f  Halakah,  from  Tj^n   ^o  proceed.      This  interpre- 

tation  keeps  more  strictly  to  the  traditional  acceptation  of 
the  Law. 

"These  traditional  ordinances,  as  already  stated,  bear 
the  general  name  of  the  Halakah,  as  indicating  alike  the  way 
in  which  the  fathers  had  walked,  and  that  which  their  chil- 


796  JEWISH   INTERPRETATION 

dren  were  bound  to  follow.  These  Halakoth  were  either 
simply  the  laws  laid  down  in  Scripture ;  or  derived  from  it, 
or  traced  to  it  by  some  ingenious  and  artificial  method  of 
exegesis;  or  added  to  it,  by  way  of  amplification  and  for 
safety's  sake ;  or  finally,  legalized  customs.  They  provided 
for  every  possible  and  impossible  case,  entered  into  every 
detail  of  private,  family,  and  public  life ;  and  with  iron  logic, 
unbending  rigor,  and  most  minute  analysis  pursued  and 
dominated  man,  turn  whither  he  might,  laying  on  him  a  yoke 
which  was  truly  unbearable.  The  return  which  they  offered 
was  the  pleasure  and  distinction  of  knowledge,  the  acquisi- 
tion of  righteousness,  and  the  final  attainment  of  rewards. 

The  Halakah  indicated  with  the  most  minute  and  pain- 
ful punctiliousness  every  legal  ordinance  as  to  outward 
observances,  and  it  explained  every  bearing  of  the  Law  of 
Moses. 

Altogether,  the  Mishna  comprises  six ''Orders"  (Sedarim), 
each  devoted  to  a  special  class  of  subjects.  The  first  * 'Order" 
(Zeraini,  "seeds")  begins  with  the  ordinances  concerning 
"benedictions,"  or  the  time,  mode,  manner  and  character 
of  the  prayers  prescribed.  It  then  goes  on  to  detail  what 
may  be  called  the  religio-agrarian  laws  (such  as  tithing. 
Sabbatical  years,  first  fruits,  etc.).  The  second  "Order" 
(Moed,  "festive  time")  discusses  all  connected  with  the  Sab- 
bath observance  and  the  other  festivals.  The  third  "Order" 
{Nashim,  "women")  treats  of  all  that  concerns  betrothal, 
marriage  and  divorce,  but  also  includes  a  tractate  on  the 
Nasirate.  The  fourth  "Order"  {{Nezikim,  "damages")  con- 
tains the  civil  and  criminal  law.  Characteristically,  it 
includes  all  the  ordinances  concerning  idol-worship  (in  the 
tractate  Ahodah  Zarah)  and  ^'the  sayings  of  the  Fathers" 
{Ahoth).  The  fifth  "Order"  (Kodashim,  "holy  things") 
treats  of  the  various  classes  of  sacrifices,  offerings,  and  things 
dedicated  to  God,  and  of  all  questions  which  can  be  grouped 
under  "sacred  things"  (such  as  the  redemption,  exchange, 
or  alienation  of  what  had  been  dedicated  to  God.)  It  also 
includes  the  laws  concerning  the  daily  morning  and  evening 
service  (Tamid),  and  a  description  of  the  structure  and 
arrangements    of    the    Temple    (Middoth,    the    ''measure- 


JEWISH   INTERPRETATION  797 

ments").  Finally,  the  sixth  "Order"  (Toharoth,  "clean- 
nesses") gives  every  ordinance  connected  with  the  questions 
of  "clean  and  unclean,"  alike  as  regards  human  beings, 
animals,  and  inanimate  things. 

These  "Orders"  are  divided  into  tractates  (Massikioth, 
Massekttyoth,  "textures,  webs"),  of  which  there  are  sixty- 
three  (or  else  sixty-two)  in  all.  These  tractates  are  again 
subdivided  into  chapters,  {Perakim) — in  all  525,  which 
severally  consist  of  a  certain  number  of  verses,  or  Misknas 
(Mishnayoth,  in  all  4,  187).  The  language  is  Hebrew,  though 
of  course  not  that  of  the  Old  Testament.  The  words  ren- 
dered necessary  by  the  new  circumstances  are  chiefly  derived 
from  the  Greek,  the  Syriac,  and  the  Latin,  with  Hebrew 
terminations.  But  all  connected  with  social  intercourse, 
or  ordinary  life  (such  as  contracts) ,  is  written,  not  in  Hebrew, 
but  in  Aramaean,  as  the  language  of  the  people. 

But  the  traditional  law  embodied  other  materials  than 
the  Halakoth  collected  in  the  Mishna.  Some  that  had  not 
been  recorded  there,  found  a  place  in  the  works  of  certain 
Rabbis,  or  were  derived  from  their  schools.  These  are 
called  Boraithas — that  is,  traditions  external  to  the  Mishna. 
Finally,  there  were  "additions"  (or  Tosephtoth),  dating  after 
the  completion  of  the  Mishna,  but  probably  not  later  than 
the  third  century  of  our  era.  Such  additions  are  added  to 
fifty-two  out  of  the  sixty -three  Mishnic  tractates.  When 
speaking  of  the  Halakah  as  distinguished  from  the  Haggadah, 
we  must  not,  however,  suppose  that  the  latter  could  be 
entirely  separated  from  it.  In  point  of  fact,  one  whole 
tractate  in  the  M^'^/^na  (Aboth :  The  Sayings  of  the  "Fa- 
thers") is  entirely  Haggadah]  a  second  {Middoth\  the 
"Measurements  of  the  Temple")  has  Halakah  in  only  four- 
teen places;  while  in  the  rest  of  the  tractates  Haggadah 
occurs  in  not  fewer  than  two  hundred  and  seven  places. 
Only  thirteen  out  of  the  sixty-three  tractates  of  the  Mishna 
are  entirely  free  from  Haggadah. 

In  course  of  time  the  discussions,  illustrations,  explana- 
tions, and  additions  to  which  the  Mishna  gave  rise,  whether 
in]^its  application,  or  in  the  Academies  of  the  Rabbis,  were 
authoritatively  collected  and  edited  in  what  are  known  as 


798  JEWISH   INTERPRETATION 

the  two  Talmuds  or  Gemaras.  If  we  imagine  something 
combining  law  reports  and  notes  of  a  theological  debating 
club — all  thoroughly  Oriental,  full  of  digressions,  anecdotes, 
quaint  sayings,  fancies,  and  legends,  and  too  often  of  what, 
from  its  profanity,  superstition,  and  even  obscenity,  could 
scarcely  be  quoted,  we  may  form  some  general  idea  of  what 
the  Talmud  is.  The  oldest  of  these  two  Talmuds  dates  from 
about  the  close  of  the  fourth  century  of  our  era.  It  is  the 
product  of  the  Palestinian  Academies,  and  hence  called  the 
Jerusalem  Talmud.  The  second  is  about  a  century  younger, 
and  the  outcome  of  the  Babylonian  schools,  hence  called  the 
Babylon  (afterwards  also  '  'our")  Talmud.  We  do  not  possess 
either  of  these  works  complete.  The  most  defective  is  the 
Jerusalem  Talmud,  which  is  also  much  briefer,  and  contains 
far  fewer  discussions  than  that  of  Babylon.  The  Babylon 
Talmud,  which  in  its  present  form  extends  over  thirty-six 
out  of  the  sixty-three  tractates  of  the  Mishna,  is  about  ten  or 
eleven  times  the  size  of  the  Mishna,  and  more  than  four  times 
that  of  the  Jerusalem  Talmud.  It  occupies  (in  our  editions) , 
with  marginal  commentations,  2,947  folio  leaves  (pages  a 
and  b).  Both  Talmuds  are  written  in  Aramsean;  the  one 
in  its  western  the  other  in  its  eastern  dialect,  and  in  both 
the  Mishna  is  discussed  seriatim,  and  clause  by  clause. 

Opposed  to  the  Talmudists  were  the  Karaites,  a  sect 
formed  in  the  seventh  or  eighth  century.  They  rejected  the 
oral  traditions  of  the  Talmud,  and  while  seeking  the  literal 
sense,  rejected  the  literalism  of  the  Talmudists. 

The  EssENEs  and  the  Alexandrian  Jews  adopted  a 
purely  mystical  interpretation  of  the  Scripture.  We  may 
judge  of  the  system  of  the  Alexandrians  from  their  represen- 
tative Philo.  According  to  him,  although  at  times  the 
literal  sense  must  be  developed  for  rude  minds  incapable  of 
higher  wisdom,  the  real  sense  of  the  Scripture  was  the  occult 
understanding  of  the  symbols  which  were  contained  in  the 
letter.  Thus  Abraham  is  the  symbol  of  the  learning  of  vir- 
tue ;  Isaac,  of  the  acquisition  of  virtue ;  Jacob,  of  its  exercise. 
Adam,  is  a  symbol  of  man  in  his  rude  state ;  Cain,  of  selfish- 
ness ;  Noah,  of  justice ;  Sara,  of  womanly  virtue ;  Rebecca,  of 
wisdom;  Egypt,  is  a  symbol  of  the  body;  the  dove,  of  the 


JEWISH   INTERPRETATION  799 

divine  wisdom,  etc.  Philo  compares  the  literal  sense  to  the 
body;  the  allegorical,  to  the  soul,  and  in  many  places 
rejects  entirely  the  literal  sense.  His  work  is  worthless  in 
exegesis. 

The  Cabalists  surpassed  Philo  in  mystic  jugglery.  The 
Cabalists  derive    their   name   from  72p,  to  receive,    since 

they  fable  that  their  system  was  secretly  delivered  to  the 
elders  on  Sinai. 

Of  the  Cabalistic  theosophy,  we  shall  say  nothing.  We 
shall  only  briefly  indicate  some  of  their  artifices,  by  which 
they  find  foundation  for  their  vain  theories  and  beliefs. 

The  first  artifice  is  called  Gematria,  in  which  occult  senses 
are  drawn  from  the  text,  by  the  numerical  value  of  the 
letters.  For  example,  the  first  verse  of  Genesis  and  the  last 
verse  of  the  Hebrew  Bible,  II.  Chron.  XXXVI.  23.  contain 
six  {«^*  The  letter  J.^  is  the  first  letter  of  H'p^^,  a  thou- 
sand; therefore,  the  world  will  endure  six  thousand  years. 

The  first  two  words  of  Genesis  ^^^  n''C^'^^^3  ^7  ^^^  ^^- 

T  T  •        ••  : 

merical  value  of  the  letters,  make  1,116;  the  same  number, 
results  from  the  numerical  value  of  the  phrase  ^^^^^J  HJti^'n 

T:    •  TT  - 

^■^•^2,  "in  the  beginning    of    the  year  it  was    created'': 

therefore,  the  world  was  created  at  the  autumnal  equinox, 
which  is  the  beginning  of  the  Jewish  year. 

By  another  artifice,  they  accept  the  several  letters  of  a 
word  for  signs  of  complete  words,  and  thus  build  a  sentence 
from  the  letters  of  one  word.  For  example  the  first  word  of 
Genesis  n^ti^^^'*)D  ^^  ^7  "^^i^  method  made  to  signify  the  sen- 
tence: 3  =  i<^3,  he  created,  *^  =  t;*'r5^-  the  firmament, 
^  =  Y'l^?,  the  earth,  ^  =  U^'Q'^,  the  heavens,  •)  =  Q\  the 
sea,  n  =  Dinn  the  abyss:  he  (God)  created  the  firmament, 
the  earth,  the  heavens,  the  sea  and  the  abyss. 

Some  Christians  have  resorted  to  Cabalistic  methods  to 
find  the  mystery  of  the  Trinity  in  the  same  term :     D  =  |j)^ 

the  Son,    *)  =  YVH,   ^^e  Spirit,  ^  =  3^,  the  Father,    ^  - 

T\vh^f  three,   ^  =  ^^r\^   unity,   n  =  HDn,   perfect;  the 


800  JEWISH   INTERPRETATION 

Son,  the  Spirit,  and  the  Father,  the  threefold  perfect  unity. 
By  adopting  just  the  reverse,  from  the  initial  letters  of 
riD^'DuS'n  1^^"n^i7''  ^r2  who  shall  lead  us  to  Heaven?    They 

T     -T  -.       T        V-:-     • 
formed  H'P^IO,  the  rabbinic  form  of  H/ID/  circumcision. 

T      •  T 

The  third  artifice,  called  Themurah  from  ^^  "^^  change, 
is  founded  in  a  metathesis  of  the  letters. 

This  may  be  wrought  in  various  ways.  i. — The  trans- 
position may  be  wrought  of  the  letters  themselves  of  any 
word,  so  that  it  may  change  its  signification.  Thus  the 
'^D^bD,  my  angel,  of  Exod.  XXIII.  23,  by  the  Themurah 
becomes  ^^^i^O  Michael,  the  name  of  the  angel. 

The  second  species  of  the  Themurah  consists  in  a  substitu- 
tion of  letters,  and  may  be  wrought  in  two  ways.  It  is 
C^DH^^/  where  the  last  letter  of  the  alphabet  is  substituted 
for  the  first  letter,  f^  for  ^ ;  the  second  last  letter  for  the 
second,  (^'  for  ^^  hence  its  name  t;!^"2"ini^-  The  second  species 
is  called  Q^^^,  and  differs  from  the  preceding  only  in  that 
they  divide  the  alphabet  in  two  equal  halves,  and  substitute 
the  first  letter  of  the  second  half,  ^^  for  the  first  letter  of  the 
first  half,  ^,  and  so  through  both  halves.  Some  believe 
that  the  Masoretic  text  has  suffered  an  interpolation  from 
the  Cabalists  in  Jer.  XXV.  26,  and  LI.  41,  where  we  read 

No  such  kingdom  is  known  in  history.  Jerome  informs 
us  that  we  should  read  by  Athbasch  7  2^^  ^^^  ^^  believes 
that  Jeremiah  with  design  concealed  the  real  name,  leaving 
it  to  the  Cabalists  to  interpret.  It  is  far  more  probable,  that 
if  722  should  be  read  there,  that  the  text  has  been  cor- 
rupted from  72D  to  Tl^^  by  the  Cabalists. 

The  most  famous  Cabalistic  treatise  is  the  Book  of  Sohar, 
i.  e.  the  Book  of  Splendor.  Though  the  Cabalists  assign  its 
origin  to  the  second  century,  it  is  most  probably  not  more 
ancient  than  the  thirteenth  century. 

Though  purporting  to  explain  the  Law,  it  is  simply  a 
Cabalistic  treatise  on  their  occult  doctrines  concerning  God, 
the  Messiah,  the  Angels,  etc.  Two  minor  works  of  similar 
argument  are  the  Books  Bahir  and  Jezira. 


JEWISH    INTERPRETATION  801 

After  the  eleventh  century  of  our  era  a  new  school  of 
Scriptural  interpretation  arose  among  the  Jews.  The  doc- 
tors of  Judaism  began  to  discard  the  old  fables,  and  to  seek 
the  literal  sense  of  the  Scripture.  Of  course,  as  they  refused 
to  recognize  Christ  as  the  Messiah,  they  could  not  come  at 
the  full  sense  of  the  Old  Testament.  But  still  their  labors 
are  useful  to  us  in  giving  us  a  fuller  knowledge  of  the  Hebrew 
tongue.  The  following  are  the  most  famous  among  these 
late  Talmudists : 

Rabbi  Salomon  Ben  Isaac,  frequently  called  Jarchi,  or 
Rashi,  was  bom  at  Troyes  in  Champagne  in  1040.  He  com- 
mented the  entire  Scripture  and  the  Talmud.  He  obtained 
great  fame  among  the  Jews,  and  the  first  Hebrew  book  ever 
printed  was  his  commentary  on  the  Pentateuch.  His  hatred 
of  Christianity  is  evident  in  many  places  in  his  works.  His 
style  is  obscure,  and  he  has  received  many  of  the  fables  of 
the  early  Talmudists.     He  died  in  1 105. 

Rabbi  Abraham  Ben  Meir  ben  Ezra,  commonly  called 
Abenezra,  was  born  at  Toledo,  in  Spain,  in  1093.  He  dis- 
tinguished himself  in  philosophy,  astronomy,  medicine, 
poetry,  mathematics,  the  languages  and  exegesis.  He  trav- 
eled much,  visited  the  principal  cities  of  Europe,  Egypt, 
and  other  parts  of  the  East.  He  died  in  1167,  on  his  way 
from  Rhodes  to  Rome. 

He  is  one  of  the  greatest  of  the  Talmudists.  He  com- 
mented the  entire  Old  Testament  except  Chronicles.  In 
this  commentary  he  seeks  the  literal  sense  of  the  text,  and 
breaks  away  from  the  old  fables.  He. was  infected  with  a 
certain  rationalistic  turn  of  mind,  and  was  most  inconstant 
in  his  opinions.  Though  his  commentary  on  the  Scriptures 
is  free  from  the  fables  of  the  Cabalists,  in  other  works  he 
indulges  his  genius  in  this  species  of  jugglery.  He  was 
endowed  with  prodigious  memory,  which  made  him  easy 
master  of  the  Jewish  thought  of  his  time. 

Rabbi  Moses  ben  Maimon,  commonly  called  Maimoni- 
des,  and  sometimes  Rambam,  was  bom  at  Cordova,  in  Spain, 
in  1 1 35..  Cordova  was  at  that  time  a  Mussulman  strong- 
hold, and  the  vernacular  tongue  of  Maimonides  was  Arabic. 
He  is  styled  Rabbi  Abram,  the  last  of  the  sages  as  regards 

(51)H.S. 


802  JEWISH    INTERPRETATION 

time,  and  the  first  in  worth.  His  life  is  enveloped  in  a  web 
of  fable.  The  few  certain  data  attainable  are,  that  he  studied 
medicine,  and  made  such  progress  in  it,  that  he  was  made  court 
physician  to  Saladin  of  Eg>-pt.  He  was  versed  in  the  Arabic 
philosophy,  and  in  mathematics,  but  his  greatest  claim  to 
fame,  is  founded  on  his  Talmudic  labors.  He  wrote  partly 
in  Hebrew  and  partly  in  Arabic.  His  greatest  work  is  his 
"Mishnah  Thorah,"  a  systematic  codification  of  the  whole 
Jewish  Law,  as  found  in  the  Bible,  the  Mishnah,  the  Tal- 
mud, and  minor  books.  The  Jews  have  held  this  book  in 
great  esteem,  and  declare  that  by  it  Maimonides  merits  a 
place  next  to  Moses  the  Lawgiver.  It  remains  a  great 
source  of  rabbinic  learning,  even  to  this  day.  Some  Jews 
have  even  neglected  the  Talmud,  to  concentrate  their  study 
on  Rambam.  It  forms  a  sort  of  tournament  for  all  later 
Talmudists,  and  to  explain  a  difficult  "Rambam,"  is  a  test 
of  learning  with  the  Talmudists.  A  MS.  of  the  work  is  in 
the  library  of  Cambridge.  Various  editions  have  been 
printed  of  it ;  the  last  and  most  complete  is  that  of  Leipsic 
in  1862. 

The  most  important  of  Maimonides'  other  works  is  the 
"Dalalatu'  1-Hkirin"  in  Arabic;  in  Hebrew  Qi^^n^H  nilDf 
' 'The  Guide  of  the  Perplexed. ' '  '      x  -       .- 

This  work  essays  to  explain  the  difficult  passages  of  the 
Bible.  Maimonides  was  conversant  with  Aristotle,  and 
made  much  use  of  his  philosophy  in  this  work.  The  work  is 
a  curious  medley  of  symbolism,  mysticism,  Greek  philosophy 
and  rationalism.  Maimonides  left  several  other  works, 
which  merit  no  special  mention  here.  He  died  at  Cairo  in 
1204. 

The  next  great  Talmudist  of  the  Middle  Ages  is  Rabbi 
David  Kimchi,  sometimes  called  Radak.  He  was  bom  at 
Narbonne  after  11 55,  and  died  probably  in  the  same  city 
about  1235.  His  father  Rabbi  Yoseph,  or  his  grandfather 
Rabbi  Isaac  (Yishak)  Ibn  Kimchi,  had  immigrated  into 
Provence  from  Spain,  whence  Arab  fanaticism  had  com- 
pelled the  Jews  to  flee.  In  Provence  the  family* took  the 
Gentile  surname  of  Petit.     Rabbi  David  lost  his  father  (who 


JEWISH   INTERPRETATION  803 

was  himself  a  grammarian,  Bible  commentator,  and  poet  of 
no  mean  order)  very  early ;  but  his  elder  and  only  brother, 
Rabbi  Mosheh  (a  fair  scholar,  but  famous  chiefly  through  his 
younger  brother) ,  was  his  principal  oral  teacher.     The  valu- 
able literary  treasures  of  his  father,  however,  falling  into 
his  hands,  Radak  grew  strong  by  studying  them,  and,  as  we 
know,  eclipsed  them  completely,  although  he    lacked    his 
father's  originality.     But,  if  Rabbi  David  lacked  original- 
ity, he  had  abundance  of  instinct  for  finding  out  the  best  in 
the  works  of  his  predecessors,  and  abundance  of  genius  for 
digesting  and  assimilating  it  till  it  became  his  own  in  a 
peculiar  way.     Although  preceded  by  Hayyuj,  Ibn  Jankh, 
and  others,  and  succeeded  by  Abraham  de  Balmes,  Elias 
Levita,  and  others,  Kimchi  has  maintained  the  position  of 
the  greatest  Jewish  grammarian  and  lexicographer.     And, 
although  much  inferior  as  a  Biblical  scholar  and  Talmudist 
to  Rashi,  and  as  a  critic  and  philosopher  to  Abraham  Ibn 
Ezra,  he  has  outstripped  both  in  the  eyes,  not  only  of  the 
Christians,  but  to  some  extent  even  of  the  Jews,  and  thus 
reigned  supreme  for  more  than  five  hundred  years,  as  a  com- 
mentator on  the  Bible.     From  the  fact  that  he  was  master 
of  the  Targums  and  Haggadoth  as  few  before  or  after  him, 
that  he  had  Hebrew,  Arabic  and  Greek  philosophy  at   his 
fingers'  ends,  and  that  he  was  endowed  with  a  truly  poetical 
soul,  the  mystery  is  explained  how  the  merely  reproductive 
scholar  could  cause  original  scholars  of  the  highest  eminence, 
but  who  were  one-sided,  to  be  all  but  forgotten.     Not  only 
have  his  works,  in  whatever  field  they  are  to  be  found,  been 
printed  and  reprinted,  but  the  most  important  of  them  are 
translated  into  Latin,  into  Judseo-German,  and  even  into 
English. 

Kimchi  has  commented  all  the  Old  Testament,  except  the 
Pentateuch,  and  of  that  he  commented  the  greater  part  of 
Genesis.  His  most  valuable  contribution  to  Hebrew  liter- 
ature is  his  Grammar  and  Lexicon.  All  subsequent  Hebrew 
lexicographers  have  drawn  from  his  Q'^t^^''^^*  "^DD  ^^e  Book 

T  T  V   •• 

of  Roots.  Of  course  comparative  philology  has  amplified 
these  data,  but  it  has  by  no  means  superseded  the  work  of 
this  Rabbi.     He  died  at  Narbonne  about  1235. 


804  JEWISH  INTERPRETATION 

Isaac  ben  Juda  Abarbanel,  or  Abravanel,  was  born 
at  Lisbon  in  1437.  His  family  was  opulent,  and  he  received 
a  liberal  education.  He  entered  the  political  career,  and 
became  Minister  of  Finance  to  Alphonsus  V.  of  Portugal, 
and  afterw^ards  to  Ferdinand  the  Catholic  of  Castile.  A 
decree  of  expulsion  in  1492  forced  him  to  leave  Spain,  and 
he  withdrew  to  Naples,  where  he  occupied  an  eminent  post 
at  the  Court  of  Ferdinand  I.  and  his  successor  Alphonsus  11. 
At  the  French  invasion,  he  fled  to  Sicily,  and  finally  fixed 
his  domicile  at  Venice,  where  he  died  in  1 508. 

During  his  wanderings,  he  composed  numerous  works 
treating  of  Holy  Scripture.  The  principal  works  are  Com- 
mentaries on  Deuteronomy,  Joshua,  Judges,  Kings,  on  the 
other  four  books  of  the  Law,  on  Daniel,  Isaiah,  on  the  other 
Prophets,  and  two  Dissertations  on  the  Messiah.  He  has 
also  other  treatises  on  special  passages  of  Holy  Scripture. 
Richard  Simon  regards  him  as  the  most  useful  of  the  Rabbis, 
and  makes  him  equal  in  Hebrew  to  Cicero  in  Latin.  This 
is  excessive  praise.  Like  all  his  class,  he  hated  the  Chris- 
tians, and  gives  evidence  of  this  hatred  in  his  use  of  Scrip- 
ture. At  times  he  is  more  of  a  rhetorician  than  an  exegete. 
Long  digressions  are  often  found  in  his  works,  made  up 
chiefly  of  dry,  stupid  subtilities,  and  attacks  on  Christianity. 

Other  Jewish  doctors  of  minor  note  are  R.  Levi  ben  Ger- 
son,  R.  Elias  Levita,  R.  Salomon  ben  Melech,  R.  Moses 
Nachmanides,  called  Ramban,  R.  Chajim,  R.  Jacob  ben 
Reuben,  R.  Aaron  ben  Joseph,  R.  Aaron  ben  Elia,  R.  Abra- 
ham de  Balmes  ben  Meir,  R.  Abraham  Halevi,  and  Abra- 
ham Usque. 

The  End  of  the  General  Introduction. 


Index  of  Subjects 


Abarbanel    -     -     -     -     -     -     804 

Abgarus'  letter  to  Jesus     615-616 
Accentuation  of  Scripture         646 
Accommodated  Sense     -  793-794 
.-Egidius  on  O.  T.  Canon     -     492 
^Ifric     -------772 

"Aetemus  lUe"     -     -     -759-761 
African  Councils  on   N.   T. 

Canon  ------598 

Albam     -------     800 

Albertus  Magnus  on  O.  T. 

Canon        -     .     _     -  502-503 
Alcuin's  Canon      .     -     -  481-485 
Alexander  of  Alex,  on  O.  T. 

Canon  -     -     -     -     -     -     372 

Alexandrian  Canon       -     259-263 
Alexandrian  Codex  A     -     -     674 
Allen,  Card.      -     -     762-763,779 
Alter       ---_---     656 
Alterations  in  Manuscripts       644 
Ambrose  on  Inspiration        86-87 
Ambrose,  St.  on  N.T. Canon     594 
Amiatinus  Codex        -     -  734-737 
Ammonius  ------     645 

Analogy  of  Faith        -     -     -     785 
Andrada      on      Decree      of 

Trent         -     -     _     .  748-749 
Anglican  Views  on  Inspira- 
tion ------     16-19 

Anglo-Saxon  Version  768-772 

Anonymus  Writer  of  Twelfth 

Century     -----     492 

Antilegomena  -     -     -     -     -     590 

Antitype      -     -     -     -     -     -     789 

Antoninus  on  O.  T.  Canon     513 
Apocalypse       -     -     -     -  583-584 

Apocalypse  of  Moses       -     -     615 
Apocrypha  and  N.  T.         559-560 

(805 


Apocrypha        quoted        by 

Fathers     -     -     -     .  358-360 
Apocryphal  Books     -     -  606-624 
Apostolic  Constitutions        -     259 
Apostolic    Constitutions  on 

O.  T.  Canon   -     276;  336-340 
Aquila,  Version  of     -     -  689-691 
Arabic  Version      -     -     -725-726 
Archaeology       -     -     -     -     -     781 

Archelaus  on  Canon  of  O.  T.     330 
Argenteus  Codex       -     -     -     721 
Armenian  Canon  -     -     -     -     368 

Armenian  Version      -     -722-725 
Arnold  on  Inspiration     -     -        14 
Assumption  of  Moses   -     61 4-6 1 5 
Athanasius  on  Inspiration  -       86 
Athanasius  on  N.  T.  Canon     592 
Athanasius    on     Canon     of 

O.  T.     -     -     -     -     -368-380 

Athbash       ------     800 

Athenagoras  on  Inspiration        83 
Athenagoras  on  O.  T.  Canon     273 
Athia       -7-----     63  5 

Augustine's  Canon  of  O.  T. 

-------  362-366 

Augustine's  Canon  of  Scrip- 
ture             87-88 

Augustine  on  Interpretation 

of  Scripture   -     -     -     -     783 

Authentic  Interpretation     -     784 
Author,  God  the,  of  Scrip- 
ture      -     -     -    194,  196,  198 
Authorization  of  Vulgate     -      739 
Authorship   of  Holy  Scrip- 
ture     -----       74-76 

Autographs     of     Scripture 

-------  649-650 

) 


806 


INDEX   OF   SUBJECTS 


Baba  Bathra  -----  249 
Bannez  on  Inspiration  89-90 
Barnabas'  Epistle  on  Canon 

ofN.  T.  -  -  -  -  -  535 
Barnabas'  Epistle  -  -621-622 
Bartolo,  di,  on   Inspiration 

-  140-142 
Bashmuric  Versions  -  -  712-718 
Basilides  on  Canon  of  N.  T. 

-------  550-551 

Basil  on  Inspiration  -  -  85-86 
Bede  on  O.  T.  Canon  -  485-487 
Bellamiine    on     Canon     of 

O.  T  -  -  -  -  -  522-523 
Bellarmine  on  Inspiration  -  98 
Bellarmine's      Opinion       of 

Lessius      -     -     -     -       97-98 

Bengel    -------     655 

Bentley       -     -     -     -     -650,655 

Beza's  Codex  D.    -     -     -  675-677 
Beza's  Codex,  Specimen      -     648 
Billot  on  Inspiration       -  187-189 
Birch       ------_     656 

Bishops'  Bible       -     -     -     -     778 

Bobbio,  Codex  of  -  -  703-704 
Bohairic  Version  -  -  712,718 
Bohairic  Version's  Canon  of 

N.  T. 593 

Bohemian  Versions  of  Scrip- 

tiu-e       -----_     768 

Bonaventure  on  O.T.  Canon     503 
Bonfrere  on  Inspiration     103-105 
Books  of  Scripture  Lost   624-625 
Boraithas     ------     7^7 

Bossuet  on  Canon  of  Trent 

-------  525-526 

Bossuet  on  Canon  of  N.  T. 

-     -     -     -     -     -     -  605-606 

Bowne  on  Inspiration  -  -  81 
"Breeches"  Bible  -  -  -  778 
Bukentop  ---...  y(f^ 
Burnet  on  Inspiration  -  -  13 
Buxtorf        --_-__     635 

Cabalists  ----__  ^gg 
Cajetan,    Card.,  on    N.    T. 

Canon  -  -  -  -  601-604 
Cajetan,    Card.,  on    O.    T. 

Canon        _     -     .     _  514-515 


Calvinist    Formulas   of  In- 
spiration   -----       34 

Calvin 's  Theory  of  Inspira- 
tion      ------       34 

Canon  of  Codex  Toletanus  -     485 
Canon  of  Jews       -     241 ,  242-246 
Canon  of  N.  T.      -     -     -     _     529 
Canon  of  N.T.  at  Beginning 

of  Third  Century     -     -     584 
Canon  of  N.  T.  of  Council 

of  Trent  -     -     -  603-605 

Canon    of    Old    Testament 

-------  240-528 

Canon  of  Scripture  Defined  -     239 
Canon  of  Scripture  of  Coun- 
cil of  Trent  -     -  239-240 
Canon     of     Syro-Hexaplar 

Text      ------     466 

Canons  of  the  Apostles   619-621 
Canon      of      the       Church 

(O.  T.)  -     -     -     -     -  263-528 

Canon  of  Trent      -     -     -     -     113 

Canus,  Melchior,  on  Inspira- 
tion   -----         88-89 

Carolinus  Codex    -     -     -     -     738 

Cassiodorus    on    Canon     of 

O.  T.         -----     467 

Causes  of  Variants     -     -  651-652 
Cavensis  Codex     -     -     -     -     485 

Challoner's  Revision        -     -     779 
Chapters  of  Bible       -     -     -     645 
Chauvin  on  Inspiration  76-80 

Chemnitz     ------     365 

Chrismann  on  Inspiration    -     112 
Church  of  Alexandria  on  N. 

T.  Canon  -     -     -     -     -     591 

Clemens    Alex,    on    N.     T. 

Canon     -     _     -     -     578-580 
Clement  VIII.     -     -     -     762-764 
Clement   of   Alexandria   on 

Canon  of  O.  T.      -     279-293 
Clement  of    x\lexandria    on 

Inspiration     -     -     _     -       g^ 
Clement  of  Rome  on  Inspira- 
tion      ------       82 

Clement  of  Rome  on  N.  T. 

Canon        -     -     -     -  539-550 

Clement  of  Rome  on  Canon 

of  O.  T.     -     -     -     -  267-269 

Clementine  Edition    -     -  762-764 
Codex  Alexandrinus  A   -     -     674 


INDEX    OF    SUBJECTS 


807 


Codex  Amiatinus 

-  734-737 

Codices  R.         .     .     _ 

-  679-680 

Codex  Am iatintis  Cano"" '^f        /<8t 

Codices  T     -      - 

fiRn 

Codex  Argenteus  -     - 

-     -     721 

\^K/\J~l\^\^^       JL    ,         •■             —             —             — 

Codices,  Uncial     -     - 

-        000 

-  663-686 

Codex  Augiensis  F     - 

-     -     685 

Collections  of  Canons 

-    -    491 

Codex  Barberini  Y    - 

-     -     681 

Concordances  of  Scripture  -     645 

Codex  Basiliensis  E. 

-     -     677 

Consciousness  of  Inspiration         4 

Codex  Beratinus  c^   - 

-     -     684 

Consequent  Inspiration 

104-105 

Codex  Bezae  D. 

-  675-677 

Constitutions       of 

the 

Codex  Blenheimius  Y 

683-684 

Apostles 

-  619-621 

Codex  Boemianus  G. 

-     -     685 

Context  of  Scripture 

-     -     782 

Codex  Boreeli  F.  -     - 

-     -     677 

Coptic  Versions    - 

-  711-718 

Codex  Campianus  M. 

-     -     679 

Correction  of  Vulgate 

-     -     754 

Codex  Cavensis     -     - 

-     -     738 

Correction    of    Vulgate 

or- 

Codex  Claromontanus  D.     -     685 

dered  by  Pius  X. 

-    :    765 

Codex  Coislin.  I.  F^  - 

-     -     677 

Correctoria  of  Vulgate 

732-734 

Codex  Cyprius  K 

-     -     678 

Correctors    -     -     -     - 

-    -    664 

Codex  Dublinensis  Z 

-     -     681 

Cosius  on  Canon    -     - 

-  -  265 

Codex  Ephraemi  C.     - 

-  673-674 

Council  in  Trullo 

-  404-405 

Codex  Forojulianus    - 

-     -     738 

Council  of  Florence 

-  509-510 

Codex  Fuldensis 

-  737-738 

Council  of  Hippo  on  O 

.  T. 

Codex  Harleian.  H     - 

-     -     677 

Canon        _     _     - 

-  361-362 

Codex  Laudianus  E  - 

-     -     684 

Council   of   Jassy  on  0 

.  T. 

Codex  Monacensis  X 

-     -     681 

Canon        -     -     . 

-     -     480 

Codex  Mosquensis  V. 

-     -     681 

Council  of  Laodicea  - 

-     -     404 

Codex  Mutinensis  H. 

-     -     685 

Council  of  Laodicea  on  N.  T,     593 

Codex  Nanianus  U.    - 

-     -     680 

Council  of    Trent    on    Holy 

Codex  N'>     -     -     -     - 

-     -     679 

Scripture        -     - 

-      70-71 

Codex  of  Bobbio 

-  703-704 

Council  of  Trent  on   0, 

.  T. 

Codex  Porphyrianus  P. 

-     -     685 

Canon        _     _     _ 

-  516-522 

Codex  Petrop.  U 

-     -     683 

Council  of  Trent  on  Canon 

Codex  Purpureus  N. 

-     -     679 

of  N.  T.    -    -     -     - 

603-605 

Codex  Regius  L. 

-  678-679 

Cotmcil    of    Carthage 

on 

Codex  Rossanensis  S 

-     -     683 

0.  T.  Canon   -     - 

-361-362 

Codex  Sangallensis  A 

-     -     682 

Coverdale's  Bible        -     - 

-     -     778 

Codex  Sangermanensis 

E    -     685 

Cozza's  Edition  of  Codex  B.     667 

Codex  Sinaiticus  ^ 

-  667-673 

Cozza-Luzi's,     Edition 

of 

Codex  Toletanus  -     - 

-     -     485 

Codex  B.         -     -     - 

-     667 

Codex  Vaticanus  S.    - 

-     -     680 

Cyprian  on  O.  T.  Canon 

343-355 

Codex  Vaticanus  B 

-  664-668 

Cranmer    on    the    Catholic 

Codex  Wolfii  A     -     - 

-  677-678 

Use  of  Scripture 

775-776 

Codex  Wolfii  B      -     - 

-  677-678 

Cranmer' s  Bible    -     -     - 

-     778 

Codex  Zacynthus  2 

-     -     683 

Crets  on  Inspiration 

108-110 

CodexI.Tisch.il.     - 

-     -     678 

Criterion,    the    Catholic, 

of 

Codex  0.  Tisch.    -     - 

-     -     682 

Scripture        _     -     - 

39-41 

Codex  P.  (Guelph.  A.) 

-     -     679 

Criterion  of  Inspiration 
Criticism,  Textual 

6-41 

-     654 

710— 711 

Codex  Q.  (Guelph.  B.) 

-     -     679 

Cureton's  Syriac         -     - 

Codex  r  (Tisch.  IV.) 

681-682 

Cyril  of  Jerusalem  on  N. 

T. 

Codex  y^     -     -     -     - 

-     -     684 

/-A 

v^anon        _     _     _     - 

_         f  r\'> 

Codex  A  (Tisch.  III.) 

-     -     683 

Cyril  of  Jerusalem  on  O. 

592 
T. 

Codices  of  Vetus  Itala 

703-705 

Canon        -     -     -     - 

380-385 

808 


INDEX    OF   SUBJECTS 


Cyril  Lucar  on  O.  T.  Canon 

479-480 

Damasus     ------     701 

Dates  of  N.  T.  Books    -     -     531 
Davidson     -     -     -     265,3^00-301 
Decree  of  Trent  on  Interpre- 
tation of  Scripture        -     783 
Decree  of  Trent  -     -739-754 

Decree  of  Vatican   Council 
on     Interpretation     of 
Scripture        -     -     -     -     784 

Denis  of  Chartreux  on  O.  T. 

Canon        -----     514 

De  Rossi      ------     635 

Deuterocanonical  Books  465-466 
Deutcrocanonical  Books  -  243 
Deuterocanonical         Books 

cited  by  N ,  T .  Writers  265-267 
"Dicta  Aliorum"       -     -  203-204 

Didiot 142 

Diognetus,  Epistle  to      -     -     558 
Dionysius  the  Areopagite  on 

O.  T.  Canon       -     -  270-272 
Dionysius      the     Great    on 

Apocalypse  -     -  589-590 

Dionysius    the     Great    on 

O.  T.  Canon        -     -    335-336 
Dionysius      the     Little     on 

Canon  of  O.  T.    -     -     -     467 
"Doctrina  Addai"     -     -     -     557 
Doctrine  of  the  Apostles    619-621 
Dods  on  Inspiration        19-32,  81 
Dogmatic  Theology  -     -     -     781 
Driver  on  Inspiration      -       15-16 
D'Hulst,  Msgr.  on  Inspira- 
tion      -----  143-149 

Dupin,    Abbe  on   Canon   of 

Trent    ------     526 

Durand  --------     182 

Dutch  Versions  of  Scripture     768 

Eadfrid        ------     771 

Ecclesiasticus  -     -     -     -     -     253 

Edesius        -----  718-720 

Egyptian  Versions     -     -711 -7 18 
Elzevir  Editions    -     -     -     -     653 

English  Versions   of   Scrip- 
ture     -----  766-779 


Enneapla     ------     693 

Epiphanius  on  N.  T.  Canon    592 
Epiphanius  on  O.  T.  Canon 

-------  385-394 

Epistle     of     Barnabas     on 

Canon  of  O.  T.    -     -     -     269 
Erasmus'  Greek  Testament 

-------  652-653 

Erasmus   on    N.    T.    Canon 

-  600-601 
Erasmus  on  O.  T.  Canon  -  514 
Errors  in  Manuscripts  -  -  650 
Errors  of  the  Vulgate  -  751-754 
Essenes  -  _  _  .  -  798-799 
Estius  on  Canon  of  N.  T.  -  533 
Estius  on  Inspiration  -  -  96 
Ethiopian  Canon  -  -  -  368 
Ethiopic  Version  -  -  718-720 
Eugene,    Bishop  of  Toledo, 

on  O.  T.  Canon  -  -  -  477 
Eugene  IV.  on  N.  T.  Canon  600 
Eusebius'  Canon  of  N.  T  590-591 
Eusebius      gives       Origen's 

Views   ------258 

Extent  of  Inspiration      -  198-238 
Ezra        ------  246-255 

Ezra,  III  Book  of      -     -  609-610 
Ezra,  IVBookof  249-251,  610-611 


Folk-lore      -----  173-174 

Families  of  Codices  -  657-662 

Fayoumian  Version         -  712-718 
Flavius     Josephus'     Canon 

-------  257-259 

Frumentius       -     .     -     -  718-720 


Gasser    (Bishop)    on    Inter- 
pretation -     -     -     -     -  785 
Gasser  on  Council  of  Trent  -  113 
Gaul,   Canon   of  Church  of 

-------  571-575 

Gelasius'  Canon  of  N.  T.       -  598 
Gelasius,   Decree  of        -  366-367 
Georgian  Version        -     -     -  725 
Gerhard  on  Inspiration    -    -  35 
German  Versions  of  Scrip- 
ture      ------  768 

Gematria     ------  799 

Geneva  Bible    -     -     -     -     -  778 


INDEX    OF    SUBJECTS 


809 


Gislebert      -----  491-492 

Glaire  (Abbe)  on  the  Canon     255 
Gothic  Version      -     -     -     -     720 

Greek  Text       -     -     -     -  642-698 

Green  on  WycHf's  Version  -     777 
Greg,  of  Nyssa  on  Inspira- 
tion      ------       86 

Greg.  Nanz.  on  N.  T  Canon  592 
Greg.  Nanz.  on  O.  T.  Canon 

-------  395-404 

Gregory  XIII.  -  -  -  756-757 
Gregory  the  Great  on  O.  T. 

Canon        -     -     -     _  468-474 
Griesbach  -     -     .     _  656-657 

Haftara        ------242 

Haggadah         _     -     _     -  795-798 
Halakah      -     -     _     -     _  795-798 
Hamel  on  Inspiration      -       91-97 
Hampole      ------     774 

Harkeleian  Version   -     -  709-710 
Healy's  (Bishop)  Answer  to 

Newman         -     -     -  128-140 
Hebrews,  Epistle  to  -     -  581-582 
Hebrews,  Gospel  of    -     -     -     621 
Hebrew  Text    -     -     -     -     -     625 

Hebrew  Text,  Editions  of  -  634 
Hebrew  Text  not  Corrupted 

-  -     -     -     -     -     -  641-642 

Hen  ten's  Revision      -     -     -     755 
Henoch,    Book  of      358,  613-614 
Hermas        -     -     -     _     _  622-623 
Hesychius    ------652 

Hexapla  of  Origen  -  -  693-695 
Hilary  on  O.  T.  Canon  405-410 
Hilary  of  Poitiers  on  N.  T. 

Canon        -----     594 

Hippolyte  on  N.  T.  Canon 

-------  560-561 

Hippolyte  on  O.  T.   Canon 

-  ------  273-276 

Historical  Method  -  -  230-238 
Historical  Sense  -  -  786-787 
History  and  Inspiration  230-238 
Holden's  Theory  -  -  111-112 
Holkot,    Robt.     on     O.     T. 

Canon  -  -  -  -  503-504 
Holzhey  on  Inspiration  177-178 
Homoeotelcuton  -  -  -  -  651 
Homologoumena  -     -     -     -     590 


Honor ius  of  Autun    -     -     -     493 
Hooker  on  Inspiration    -     -        12 
Hopfl       -------     151 

Home     -     -     -     -     -     -     -     522 

Hort        -------     663 

Houbigant        -     -     -     -  635-636 

Hug  --------     657 

Hugh  of  St.  Cams  -  506-507,  645 
Hugh  of  St.  Victor  on  O.  T. 

Canon        _     -     -     _  496-497 
Hummelauer,  von      -     -  178-182 


532 


Ignatius   (Martyr),    Epistles 

of      ------      - 

Ignatius  (Martyr),  on  Canon 

ofN.  T.  1  -  -  -551-553 
Ildephonsus    of   Toledo   on 

O.  T.  Canon  -  -  -  476-477 
Innocent  I,  Canon  of  -  -  367 
Innocent  I,  Canon  of  N,  T. 

of     -------     598 

Inspiration,  Criterion  of  6-41 

Inspiration  Defined         -       71-73 
Inspiration,  Definition  of  -  2 

Inspiration      Drawn     from 

Bible  Alone  -  -  -  81-82 
Inspiration,     Franz  el  in's 

View  of     -     -     -     -     -  4 

Inspiration,  how  Evidenced         5 
Inspiration       incompatible 

with  Error  -  -  -  -  63 
Inspiration,  Private  -  37-39 
Inspiration,  whether  Known 

to  Writer  -----  3 
Inspired  Writings,  Existence 

of     ------     -  I 

Interpretation  of  Scripture  779 
Irenseus  on  Canon  of  N.  T.  530 
Irenaeus  on  Inspiration  83-85 
Irenaeus  on  N.  T.  Canon 
Irenasus  on  O.  T.  Canon 
Isaiah,  Ascension  of  - 
Isidore  of  Seville  on  O 

Canon        _     -     - 
Itala,  Vetus      -     -     - 


571-575 
276-279 
-  615 
T. 

474-476 
698-701 


Italian  Versions  of  Scripture  768 

Jablonski -  635 

Jason  of  Cyrene     -     -     -     -  3 

Jahn's  Theory  of  Inspiration  105 


810 


INDEX   OF    SUBJECTS 


Jaugey    -------     149 

Jerome  and  Rufinus  -  434-435 
Jerome's  Controversy    with 

Augustine       -     -     -  435-440 
Jerome,  Life  of      -     -     -  413-441 
Jerome  on  Canon  of  O.  T. 

-------  441-465 

Jerome  on  Inspiration    -     -       87 
Jerome's  Canon  of  N.  T.  595-598 
Jerome's  Influence     -     -     -     490 
Jerome's  "Law  of  History" 

-------  183-186 

Jerome's  Revision  of  Vetus 

Itala     ------701 

Jerome's  Vulgate  -  -  726-732 
Jesus'  Letter  to  Abgarus  -  616 
Jewish  Canon  -  -  -  243-246 
Jewish  Interpretation  -  795-804 
John  Beleth  on  O.  T.  Canon  494 
John    Chrysostom's    Canon 

ofN.  T.  -  -  -  -  -  593 
John  Damascene  on  O.  T. 

Canon  -----  477 
John,  Epistles  of  -  -  582-583 
John  of  Ragusa  -  -  -  -  504 
John  of  Trevisa  -  -  -  -  774 
John  of  Salisbury  on  N.  T. 

Canon  -  -  -  -  599-600 
John  of  Salisbury  on  O.  T. 

Canon  -  -  -  -  500-501 
Jowett   on   Inspiration  14-15 

Jude,  Epistle  of  -  -  -  -  582 
Jude's  Use  of  the  Apocrypha  614 
Julius  Africanus  -  _  -  -  468 
Julius   Africanus   on   O.    T. 

Canon        -----     294 
Justin  on  Canon  of  N.  T.  555-556 
Justin  (Martyr)  on  Inspira- 
tion      -----       82-83 


Karaites       ------798 

Karkaphensian   Version      -     710 
Kennicott  -     -     _     -  636-637 

Kimchi         -     -     -     _     -  802-803 
King  James'  Bible    -     -     -     778 


Lachmann 
Lacome,  P^rc 
Lagrange 


-  -  658-659 

-  166-167 

146,  150-172 


Latin  Versions      -     -     -  698-701 
Lamy,  Bernard,  on  Canon  of 

Trent    ------526 

Lenormant    on    Inspiration 

-------  114-115 

Leo  XIII.    -----  149-150 

Leo  XIII.  on  Holy  Scripture 

-------      41-69 

Leontius  of  Byzantium  on 

Canon  of  O.  T.   -     -     -     468 
Lessius,  Theory  of,  on    In- 
spiration        -     -     -      91-97 
Letters    of    Blessed    Virgin 

Mary  _     -     -     _  617-618 

Literal  Sense    -     -     786,790-793 
Liturgy  of  St.  Mark      -  618-619 
Liturgy  of  St.  Matt.      -  618-619 
Liturgy  of  St.  Peter      -  618-619 
Loisy  on  Inspiration      -  175-176 
Lost  Books  of  Scripture    624-625 
Lou  vain,  University  of,  on 

Inspiration     -     -     -     -       88 

Lucian    -------652 

Lucifer  of  Cagliari  on  N.  T. 

Canon  -  -  .  _  -  594 
Lutherans'  N.  T.  -  -  -  606 
Luther  on  Inspiration     -     -  8-1 1 


Maccabees,  III  Book  of  612-613 
Maccabees,  IV  Book  of  -  -  613 
Macedonian  Dialect  -  -  -  643 
Mai  (Card.)  Edition  of  Co- 
dex B.  -----  666 
Maimonides  _  -  -  -  801-802 
Maitland        on         Catholic 

Church  -----  768 
Malachi  -----  256-257 
Manasseh,  Prayer  of  -  -  612 
Manning,  Card,  on  Inspira- 
tion -  -  -  11-15,  72-74 
Marcion  on  N.  T.  Canon  558-559 
Marchini  on  Inspiration  99-100 
Mariana   on    Decree    of 

Trent  -----  742-744 
Masorah  -----  630-633 
Masorites  -----  630-633 
Materials  for  Writing  643-644 
Matthaei  -----  655-656 
Matthew's  Bible  -     -  777-778 


INDEX   OF    SUBJECTS 


811 


Mechanical    Theory    of    In- 
spiration   -----     193 

MeUton  on  O.  T.  Canon    355-358 
Memphitic  Version  -  712-718 

Mesrob    -     -     -     -     -     -     -     722 

Metaphorical  Sense  -  787-788 

M^thode  Historique  146,  150-172 
Methodius  on  O.  T.  Canon 

-------  330-335 

Michaelis,  John    David,    on 

Inspiration     -     -     -       35-36 
Midrash        -----  795-798 

Mill  -     -     -     -    650,654-655 

Milner  on  Inspiration     -       37-38 
Mishna         _     -     -     -     _  795-798 
Moldenhawer    -     -     -     -     -     656 

More,  Sir  Thomas,  on  Wyclif  775 
Moses,  Apocalypse  of  -  -  615 
Moses,  Assumption  of  -  614-615 
Muratori's  Canon  -  -  562-571 
Murillo    -------     186 

Neckam    Alex,    on    O.    T. 

Canon  ------     503 

Nehemiah's  Collection    -  253-254 
Newman,  Card,  on  Inspira- 
tion      -----  1 1 5-1 28 

New  Testament  of  Sects    605-606 
Netter,  Thos.   -----     504 

Nicephortis  on  O.  T.  Canon 

-------  477-478 

Nicholas  of  Lyra       -     -  508-509 
Nicolas    I,    Pope,    on    the 

O.  T.  Canon  -     -     -  489-490 
Nestorian   Canon   of  O.   T. 

-     -     -     -     -     -     -  467-468 

Notker,  Balbulus,  on   O.  T. 

Canon        -     -     -     -  490—491 

"  Obeli "  of  Origen     -     -     -     694 
"Obiter  Dicta"     -     -     -     -     128 

Occam,  Wm.  -     -     _  507-508 

Octapla  -------     693 

Origen's  Hexapla  -  -  693-695 
Origen  on  Canon  of  O.  T.  293-330 
Origen  on  Inspiration  -  -  85 
Origen  on  N.  T.  Canon  -  584-588 
Onkelos,  Targum  of  -  706-707 
Ormulum,  The  -  -  -  769,  773 
Ottobonianus  Codex       -     -     738 


Pagninus      ------     739 

Palestinian  Syriac      -     -     -     711 
Palimpsests       -     -     -     _  644-645 
Pamphilus  (Martyr)   -     -     -     695 
Paper      -------     644 

Papias  on  Canon  of  N.  T.    -     554 
Parasha        ------     242 

Parchment        _     _     -     -  643-644 
"Pastor"  on  O.  T.   Canon 

-     -     -     -     -     -     -  269-270 

Pastor  of  Hermas      -     -  622-623 
Paul's  Epistle  to  Laodiceans     621 
Paul's  Letters  to  Seneca    -     618 
Paul  of  Telia  -     -     -709-710 

Paul's   witness   to   Inspira- 
tion      ------     6-7 

Paulinus  Codex     -     -     -     -     738 

Persian  Version     -     -     -     -     725 

Pearson     Defends    Catholic 

Church       -----     766 

Pesch      -------190 

Pesch  on  Inspiration       -     -       80 
Pesch,  Zanecchia        -     -     -     m 
Peshitto,  Syriac    -     -     -  708-709 
Peter,  II.  Epistle  of  -     -     -     582 
Peter   Comestor   on    O.    T. 

Canon        -     -     _     -  494-495 
Peter,  Judgment  of         -  619-621 
Peter  of  Blois        _     -     -     -     4Q3 
Peter  of    Cluny    on    O.    T. 

Canon        -     -     _      .  498-499 
Peter    of    Riga    on    O.    T. 

Canon        -----     492 

Peter,  St.,  on  N.  T.  Canon  -     533 
Philaretes  on  O.  T.  Canon 

-  480-481 
Philastrius  of  Brescia  on  N. 

T,  Canon         _     -     -     _     594 
Philoxenian  Version        -  709-710 
Photius  on  O.  T.  Canon    478-479 
Pirke  Aboth     -     -     -     -     -     249 

Pius  V.   -------     756 

Pius  X.        ------     172 

Poly  carp  on  N.  T.  Canon  536-539 
Poly  carp   on   O.   T.   Canon 

-------  272-273 

Polyglot  Complutensian    652-653 
Polyglot,  Walton's     -     -     -     654 
Poncius  on  Decree  of  Trent     749 
Plantin   -------     635 

Prophetic  Inspiration     -  192-193 


812 


INDEX    OF    SUBJECTS 


Prat  --------     174 

Protestant  Canon       -     -     -     528 
Protestant  Criterion  of  In- 
spiration -     -     -     -  7-39 

' '  Providentissimus   Deus ' ' 

-     -       41-69 

Psalms  of  Solomon  -  -  -  612 
Psalters  -----  701-702 
Punctuation     of     Scripture 

-     -     -     -     -     -     -  646-649 

Quotations  from  O.  T.  by  N. 

T.  Writers      -     -     -     -     264 

Rabbi  Solomon  Ben  Isaac  -  801 
Rationalistic  Views  of  In- 
spiration -  -  -  11-19 
Relative  Element  in  Scrip- 
ture -  -  -  -  175,  i88 
Rescripti  Codices  -  -  644-645 
Revelation  -  -  -  -194-195 
Revelation        distinguished 

from  Inspiration    69 ,  70 ,  71, 
^72,  73,  91,  92,  93,  95 
Rhabanus  Maurus  on  O.  T. 

Canon  _  -  -  -  488-489 
Rheims-Douay  Version  -  779 
Richard  Simon  -  -  -  -  112 
Robert  Etienne  -  -  -  -  646 
Rohling  _  -  -  -  .  113-114 
Rudolph     of    Flavigny    on 

O.  T.  Canon  -  -  -  -  498 
Rufinus  on  N.  T.  Canon  -  595 
Rufinus  on  O.  T.  Canon  410-413 
Rupert  of  Deutz  on  O.  T. 

Canon  -  -  -  -  495-496 
Russian    Synod    on    O.    T. 

Canon        -     -     -     -  480-481 


Savi   --------     142 

Schmid  on  Inspiration    -  106-108 
Scholz    -----       -  657-658 

Science  and  Inspiration    231-235 
Science  and  Scripture    -     -       59 
Semeria        .-----142 

Seneca,  Paul's  Letters  to    -     618 
Sense  of  Scripture     -     -     -     786 
Sepulveda    ------     665 

Septuagint        -     .     -     -  686-689 
Septuagint  Editions  of    -  696-698 
Septuagint  quoted  by  N.  T. 

Writers      -     -     -     -  264-267 

Sinaitic  Codex       -     -     -     -     593 

Sinaitic  Codex  ^        -     -  667-673 
Sinaitic  Syriac  Palimpsest    -     711 
Sirleti      ------  755-756 

Sixtine  Edition  of  Vulgate 

-------  757-761 

Sixtus  of  Sienna  on   O.  T. 

Canon        -     -     -     -  523-524 

Sixtus  V.     -     -     -     -     -  757-761 

Sixtus  Senensis      -     -     -     -     243 

Slavonic  Version  -     -     -     -     725 

Solomon,  Psalms  of  -     -     -     612 
Species  of  Literature      -  1 90-1 91 
Statianus  Codex    -     -     -     -     738 

Stephen  Harding        -     -     -     491 
Stephen  Langton        -     -     -     645 
Stichometry      -     -     -     -  646-649 

Suarez  on  Inspiration     -       98-99 
Subjective  Criterion  of  In- 
spiration     -     -  26-32,  36-37 
Symmachus,  Version  of    691-692 
Synagogue,  the  Great     -  255-256 
Syriac  Canon    -----     368 

Syriac  Versions     -     -     -  707-711 
Syro-Hexaplar  Text        -709-710 


Sahidic  Version  -  -  -712-718 
Sahidic  Version's  Canon  of 

N.T.    ------     593 

St.    Augustine's    Canon    of 

N.  T.  -     -     -     -  598-599 

Salmeron  on  Decree  of  Trent  746 
Samaritan  Codex  -  -  638-640 
Sanday  on  Inspiration  -  15-16 
Sanders  O.  S.  B.  -  -  -  -  175 
Sorbonne,  Censure  of      -       91-95 


Talmud        -     -     -     -     -795-798 
Talmud    on     the     Canon 

-  -  -  -  249-250,  252-253 
Targums  -----  705-707 
Tatian's  Canon  of  N.T.  -  -  557 
Temple  (Archbishop)  on  In- 
spiration -  -  -  -  17-19 
Tertullian  on  Canon  of  N. 

T.  -     -     -     -     -575-578 

Tertullian  on  O.  T.  Canon 

-------  340-343 


INDEX    OF    SUBJECTS 


813 


Tetrapla       ------     693 

Textual  Criticism       -     -     -     654 
Theodotion,  Version  of  -     -     692 
Themurah   ------     800 

Theodulf  on  O.  T.  Canon    -     485 
Theophilus    of   Antioch    on 

N.  T.    -     -     -     -     -  561-562 

Thomas  of  Aquin       -     -  504-506 
Thomas  of  Harkel      -     -709-710 
Thomas.  St.,  on  Inspiration 

-------  195-196 

Tischendorf      -     -     -     -  659-662 

Toletanus  Codex  -     -     -     -     485 

Toleti      ------  762-763 

Tostatus    on    O.    T.    Canon 

-------  511-513 

Tregelles      ------     662 

•'Two  Ways"         -     -     -619-621 
Tychsen       ------     656 

Tyndale's  Version      -     -  776-777 
Type       -------     789 

Typical  Sense  -     -     788-790,  793 


Ubaldi  on  Inspiration     -  526-527 
Ulphilas       -     -     -     -     -     -     721 

Uncial  Codices  -  -  -663-686 
Ussher     -------654 

Vallicellianus  -  -  -  -  -  738 
Valverde  -----  763-764 
Van  der  Hooght  -  -  635-636 
Variants,  Causes  of  -  -  651-652 
Vaticanus  Codex  and  N.  T.  593 
Vaticanus  Codex  -  -  -  -  664 
Vega  on  Decree  of  Trent  746-748 


Verbal     Inspiration  101-102, 

107-108,  109,  206-229 
Vercellone's  Edition  of  Co- 
dex B         -     -     -     -  666-667 

Verses  in   Scripture   due   to 

Robert  Etienne        -     -     653 
Vetus  Itala       .     -     -     -  698-701 
Vulgate,  Authorization  of  -     739 
Vulgate,  Correction  of    -     -     754 
Vulgate,  Errors  of  the    -  751-754 
Vulgate  of  Council  of  Trent 

-------  739-754 

Vulgate  of  Jerome     -     -  726-732 


Walafrid   Strabo   on   O.    T. 

Canon        -----     489 

Walton's  Polyglot      -     -     -     654 
Wetstein      ------     655 

Westcott      ------     663 

Westminster  Confession  on 

Inspiration  -  -  -  34-35 
Whitby  on  Inspiration  -  12-13 
Williams  on  Inspiration  -  15 
Worthington  Thos.  -  -  -  779 
Writing  Materials  -  -  643-644 
Wyclifs  Version         -     -  766-777 


Ximenes,    Card. 
Canon 


O.    T. 


514 


Zannecchia   on  Inspiration 

-     -       91,  iio-iii,  176-177 
Zwinglius  on  Inspiration       33-34 


